Skip to main content

Full text of "The Lambeth conferences of 1867, 1878, and 1888 : with the official reports and resolutions, together with the sermons preached at the conferences"

See other formats

oF 1867, 1878, AND 1888. 

a re 



-ἃ Ξ - 

If, after the expiration of 14 days, the 
work is demanded by the Librarian and 
NOT RETURNED, a fine of Id. Per Day 

will be incurred.—(Rule 26). 




7] 4 “2 a 4 
No. A ps "πῆρ τὼ 2 g ἤ ; 
VY ΟΣ ΑΜ, oO vr * 

πε τὺ, 

we tae 


ae ates 

Ghe Liambeth Clonferences. 

The Lambeth Conferences 


1867, 1878, and 1888. 

With the Official Reports and Resolutions, together 

with the Sermons preached at the Conferences. 




BRIGHTON : 135, Nortu STREET. 

New York: E. ἃ J. B. YOUNG ἃ Co. 


PAM. <1. 
CuHapP. I.—The First Conference, ΤῸ). ace dis ee 9 
Cuap. II.—The Second Conference, 1878 Ee 
Cuap. I1I.—The Third Conference, 1888. ids ere 

I.—Letters from the Canadian Bishops: Reply of 
the Archbishop of Canterbury Re ee ies ee δἢ 
II.—Action taken by the Convocation of Canterbury 55 

III.—Official “ Programme of Arrangements” issued 
by the Archbishop of Canterbury for the 

Conference of 1867 ... | ... se ἜΡΗΜΟΣ; ὦ 
IV.—Sermon by the Bishop of Illinois, Sept. 24, 
ty τ νέν ἐπ oe ten aut Stir is OF 
V.—Archbishop Longley’s Opening Address, Sept. 24, 
1867 φὴς per “ΝΗ wie a ne. 77 
VI.—Amended Programme adopted during the Ses- 
sions i ies pis ὮΝ baa τ Ὁ 39 

VII.—Formal “Address to the Faithful” from the 
Bishops attending the Conference of 1867 ... 88 

VIII.—Latin and Greek Versions of the Address ... 92 

6 Lambeth Conferences. 

IX.—Resolutions formally passed by the Conference 
of 1867 ... Sip τὰν er wad iene 
X.—Correspondence with Dean Stanley about the 
use of Westminster Abbey, 1867 ___... sae 808 

XI.—Sermon by the Bishop of Montreal, Sept. 28, 
1867 τ Sp a ae τὰς op τ 

XII.—Reports of the Committees appointed by the 

Conference of 1867... abe: ΕΣ kite ae 
(A) Synodical System ... bits ows: RID 
(B) Voluntary Spiritual Tribunals ik Ὁ ρα τό κι ἐν, 
(c) Courts οὗ Metropolitans ... ἘΞ | 
(D) Election of Bishops vr Pe ες i 
(E) Declaration of submission to Svan i ae 
(F) Provincial Subordination ... Sie Σὰν 3.28 
(6) Missionary Bishoprics ns τὴ “ὦ 
(H) Condition of the Church in N atal os δ γι 
(J) Letters Dimissory ... nat a ine; 90 © 

XIII.—Resolutions of the Conference ase at the 
Adjourned Session, Dec. 10, 1867... ai 290 

XIV.—Addresses from the Canadian and West Indian 
Houses of Bishops, 1872 and 1873 .... PEED Φ9 

XV.—Correspondence between the Bishops of the 
Protestant Episcopal Church in the United 
States and the Archbishop of Canterbury, 
1874 and 1875 ... a haa ne eae F | 

XVI.—Memorandum of the Canadian House of 
Bishops, 1874... ae ἘΡΕ Re feet She 

XVII.—Action of the Convocations of Canterbury and 
York with reference to the pests Second 
Conference ies ae iv . - 149 

XVIII.—Circular Letter of Inquiry addressed by the 
Archbishop of Canterbury to all the Anglican 
Bishops, March 28, 1876 a pa ὑπο τ 

Contents. 7 

XIX.—Letter of Invitation to the Conference of 1878, 
dated July 10,1877... “at Aa i eS 

XX.—Sermon by the Archbishop of York, on July 
ye rg: ὡς aA χε πῶ ον Peete i 

XXI.—Official “Letter” of the Bishops attending 
the Conference of 1878, including the 
Reports ... me bia ΡῈ diss ie TOR 
(1) Best mode of maintaining union ιν, 164 
(2) Voluntary Boards of Arbitration ... PAS Ip i 
(3) Missionary Bishops and Missionaries ... 174 
(4) Anglican Chaplains on the Continent ... 179 
(5) Answers to questions submitted during 
_ the Conference ... τὰ oa εἰς 188 

XXII.—Latin and Greek Versions of the Letter ... 191 

XXIII.—Official List of the Bishops present at the 
; Conference of 1878 ... a ae ica’ 208 

XXIV.—Order of precedence observed at the Con- 
ference of 1878... ἂν ed ἘΡ vce 206 

XXV.—Sermon by the Bishop of Pennsylvania, July 
27, 1898s bei Sa ike me 40 208 

XXVI.—Prayer issued for use before and during the 
Conference ti ai EP * ee 222 

XXVII.—Papers issued to the Bishops in connection 

with the Conference of 1888 ... ee Pe σὴ 
XXVIII.—Sermon by the Archbishop of Canterbury, 
on July, 2, 1888... es a dea ven 329 

XXIX.—Sermon by the Bishop of Minnesota, on July, 
P1888: i. ὙΠ bia des See seg 2G 

XXX.—Address to the Queen, July 27, 1888, and Her 
Majesty’s Reply... ete δὸς ies sen, 252 

8 Lambeth Conferences. 

XXXI.—Official List of the Bishops present at the 
Conference of 1888 rem it 

XXXII.—Official List of the Bishops present at the 
Conference, arranged according to Provinces 

XXXIII.—Encyclical Letter from the Assembled 
Bishops, issued July 27, 1888... cs 

XXXIV.—Resolutions formally adopted by the Con- 
ference of 1888 ois Sree bit ΝΑ ΥᾺ ean 

XXXV.—Reports of Committees :— 
(1) Intemperance 
(2) Purity... 
(3) Divorce 
(4). Polygamy 
(5) Observance of Sunday 
(6) Socialism ἀξ. 
(7) Care of Emigrants ... 
(8) Mutual Relations of Dioceses and 
Branches of the Anglican Communion... 
(9) Home Reunion a 
(10) Scandinavian Church, Old Catholics, &c... 
(11) Eastern Churches 

(12) Authoritative Standards of Doctrine and 

XXXVI.—Statement in regard to Ordinations per- 
formed by Dr. Cummins, &c. 

XXXVII.—Sermon by the Archbishop of York, July 
28, 1888 | ‘ yen ὌΝ ae 

XXXVIII.—Latin and Greek Versions of the Encyclical 
Letter and Resolutions of 1888 












NA Reve DIE. 



ERHAPS it is not too much to say that a 
decennial Conference of the bishops of the 
Anglican Communion, under the presidency of the 
Archbishop of Canterbury, has now become a recog- 
nised part of the organisation of our Church, and 
the general attention which has been directed to 
the third of these Conferences seems to afford a 
suitable opportunity for recalling the history and 
doings of the earlier gatherings of 1867 and 1878. 

The first official step in connexion with the assem- 
bling of such a Conference was taken, not 1n England, 
but in Canada. The notion had, indeed, been “in 
the air” for many years,! both in England and abroad, 
and the final impulse which brought about a Con- 
ference was eminently significant of the changed 
conditions of the Church. 

It arose, strange to say, from the interest awakened 
in North America by the Church affairs of South 

At the Provincial Synod of the Canadian Church, 
held on September 20, 1865, it was unanimously 
agreed, upon the motion of the Bishop of Ontario, to 
urge upon the Archbishop of Canterbury and the 
Convocation of his Province that means should be 
adopted “by which the members of our Anglican 

‘ A reference to some of the earlier suggestions on the 
subject will be found in the Guardian of June 19, 1878, p. 857. 
B ee 

ΙΟ Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

Communion in all quarters of the world should have 
a share in the deliberations for her welfare, and be 
permitted to have a representation in one General 
Council of her members gathered from every land.” ἢ 

To a more personal appeal which accompanied this 
address, Archbishop Longley replied in guarded 
terms. “ The meeting of such a Synod,” he said, “ is 
not by any means foreign to my own feelings... . 
I cannot, however, take any step in so grave a matter 
without consulting my episcopal brethren in both 
branches of the united Church of England and 
Ireland, as well as those in the different colonies and 
dependencies of the British Empire.” 

In May, 1866, the Convocation of Canterbury 
appointed a committee to “consider and report 
upon” the Canadian address, and the whole subject 
was fully debated in Convocation in the following 
spring. Obvious difficulties and dangers were 
suggested, but in the end the Lower House con- 
veyed to the Archbishop of Canterbury “ἃ re- 
spectful expression of an earnest desire that he 
would be pleased to issue an invitation to all the 
bishops in communion with the Church of England, 
to assemble at such time and place, and accom- 
panied by such persons as may be deemed fit, for the 
purpose of Christian sympathy and mutual counsel 
on matters affecting the welfare of the Church at 
home and abroad.’”? 

In the Upper House, Archbishop Longley took 
the utmost pains to “diminish the doubts and diffi- 
culties” of some of his brethren. “It should be 
distinctly understood,” he said, “that at this meeting 
no declaration of faith shall be made, and no decision 
come to which shall affect generally the interests of 

1 For the full text of the address and reply, see Part II., No. I., 
p. 51, and Chronicle of Convocation of Canterbury, May 2, 
1866, p. 286 ; Feb. 12, 1867, p. 696. 

* Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 14, 1867, p. 793. 

Invitation to the First Conference. II 

the Church, but that we shall meet together for 
brotherly counsel and encouragement ....I should 
refuse to convene any assembly which pretended to 
enact any canons, or affected to make any decisions 
binding on the Church... . 1 feel I undertake a 
great responsibility in assenting to this request, and 
certainly if I saw anything approaching to what [15 
apprehended] as likely to result from it, I should 
not be disposed to sanction it, but I can assure [my 
brethren] that I should enter on this meeting in the 
full confidence that nothing would pass but that 
which tended to brotherly love and union, and would 
bind the Colonial Church, which is certainly ina 
most unsatisfactory state, more aaa to the Mother 
Church.” } 

A week later the Archbishop issued ‘the following 
invitation to all the bishops of the Anglican Com- 
munion, then 144 in number :— 

** LAMBETH PALACE, Fed. 22, 1867. 

“1 request your presence at a meeting of the 
bishops in visible communion with the United Church 
of England and Ireland, purposed (God willing) to 
be holden at Lambeth, under my presidency, on the 
24th of September next and the three following days 
_ “The circumstances under which I have resolved 
to issue the present invitation are these :—The 
Metropolitan and Bishops of Canada, last year, 
addressed to the two Houses of the Convocation of 
Canterbury the expression of their desire that I 
should be moved to invite the bishops of our Indian 
and Colonial Episcopate to meet myself and the 
Home bishops for brotherly communion and con- 

“The consequence of that appeal has been that 

' Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 15, 1867, p. 807. 

12 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

both Houses of the Convocation of my province have 
addressed to me their dutiful request that I would 
invite the attendance, not only of our Home and 
Colonial bishops, but of all who are avowedly in 
communion with our Church. The same request 
was unanimously preferred to me at a numerous 
gathering of English, Irish,and Colonial archbishops 
and bishops recently assembled at Lambeth; at 
which,—I rejoice to record it,—we had the counsel and 
concurrence of an eminent bishop of the Church in 
the United States of America,—the Bishop of Illinois. 

“Moved by these requests, and by the expressed 
concurrence therein of other members both of the 
Home and Colonial episcopate, who could not be 
present at our meeting, I have now resolved,—not, 
I humbly trust, without the guidance of God the 
Holy Ghost,—to grant this grave request, and call 
together the meeting thus earnestly desired. I greatly 
hope that you may be able to attend it, and to aid 
us with your presence and brotherly counsel thereat. 

“T propose that, at our assembling, we should first 
solemnly seek the blessing of Almighty God on our 
gathering, by uniting together in the highest act of 
the Church’s worship. After this, brotherly consul- 
tations will follow. In these we may consider to- 
gether many practical questions, the settlement of 
which would tend to the advancement of the kingdom 
of our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, and to the 
maintenance of greater union in our missionary work, 
and to increased intercommunion among ourselves. 

“Such a meeting would not be competent to make 
declarations or lay down definitions on points of 
doctrine. But united worship and common counsels 
would greatly tend to maintain practically the unity 
of the faith ; whilst they would bind us in straiter 
bonds of peace and brotherly charity. 

“T shall gladly receive from you a list of any sub- 
jects you may wish to suggest to me for consideration 
and discussion. Should you be unable to attend, 
and desire to commission any brother bishop to 

Difficulties of an Agenda-paper. 13 

speak for you, I shall welcome him as your repre- 
sentative in our united deliberations. 

“But I must once more express my earnest hope 
that, on this solemn occasion, I may have the great 
advantage of your personal presence. 

“ And now I commend this proposed meeting to 
your fervént prayers; and, humbly beseeching the 
blessing of Almighty God on yourself and your 
diocese, I subscribe myself, 

“ Your faithful brother in the Lord, 

‘The invitation was accepted by seventy-six 
bishops, and as soon as those who came from the 
Colonies and the United States began to arrive in 
England, a series of preliminary meetings was held 
to discuss and arrange the details of a Conference for 
which no precedent existed to serve as a guide. The 
strong divergence of opinion upon the legal aspect 
of Bishop Colenso’s deposition and excommunication, 
and the fact that the Bishop of Capetown had come to 
England on purpose to secure, if possible, the synodical 
sanction of the Conference to the course he had him- 
self adopted, made the agenda-paper a matter of no 
small difficulty, if it was to be kept within the limits 
laid down by the Archbishop of Canterbury in the 
Convocation speech which has been quoted above. 
Not a few of the English bishops felt so sure of the 
increased confusion such a Conference must cause in 
an already tangled web that they declined to attend 
its deliberations. Among these were the Archbishop 
of York and the Bishops of Durham, Carlisle, Ripon, 
Peterborough, and Manchester. Others, including 
Bishop Thirlwall, of St. David’s, postponed their 
acceptance until the official agenda-paper or pro- 
gramme should be published, a fact to which they 
afterwards called attention when the programme had 
unexpectedly been changed. 

The Conference met on Tuesday, September 24, 

1 For its full text, see Part II., No. 111.) p. 56. 

14 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

the opening service being preceded by a Celebration 
of Holy Communion in Lambeth Palace Chapel, 
with a sermon from Bishop Whitehouse, of Il|linois.! 
The meetings of the Conference were held in the 
upstairs dining-hall, or “guard-room,” of Lambeth 
Palace, not (as was the case in 1878) in the great 
library. On the Archbishop of Canterbury’s right 
sat the Archbishop of Armagh, the Bishop of London, 
the Presiding Bishop of the American Church, the 
Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, the Bishop 
of Calcutta, and the Bishop of Sydney. On the left 
were the Archbishop of Dublin, and the Bishops of 
Montreal, New Zealand, and Capetown. The other 
bishops sat in front. The Bishop of Gloucester and 
Bristol acted as episcopal secretary to the meeting 
throughout its deliberations. 

In his opening address,” Archbishop Longley again 
defined, with some care, the position of the Con- 
ference. “It has never been contemplated,” he said, 
“that we should assume the functions of a general 
synod of all the churches in full communion with 
the Church of England, and take upon ourselves to 
enact canons that should be binding upon those 
here represented. We merely propose to discuss 
matters of practical interest, and pronounce what 
we deem expedient in resolutions which may serve 
as safe guides to future action. Thus it will be seen 
that our first essay is rather tentative and experi- 
mental, in a matter in which we have no distinct 
precedent to direct us.” 

Special importance attached to the discussions of 
the first day, when, in the form of a preamble to the 
subsequent resolutions, the standpoint taken by the 
Anglican Church was in general terms described. 
All the leading bishops took part in the debate, and 
its outcome will be best seen by placing the para- 
graph, as it was first drafted, side by side with the 
form which was finaily agreed upon. 

1 See Part II., No. IV., p. 61. 3 See Part II., No. V., p. 77- 

The Alternative Preamble. 

As originally drafted. 

“We, Bishops of Christ’s 
Holy Catholic Church, profes- 
sing the faith of the primitive 
and undivided Church, as based 
on Scripture, defined by the 
first four General Councils,! 
and reaffirmed by the Fathers 
of the English Reformation, 
now assembled by the good 
providence of God at the Archi- 
episcopal Palace of Lambeth, 
under the presidency of the 
Primate of all England, desire, 
first, to give hearty thanks to 
Almighty God for having thus 
brought us togetherfor common 
counsels and united worship ; 
secondly, we desire to express 
the deep sorrow with which we 
view the divided condition of 
the flock of Christ throughout 
the world ; and, lastly, we do 
here solemnly declare our belief 
that the best hope of future re- 
union will be found in drawing 
each of us for ourselves closer 
to our common Lord, in giving 
ourselves to much prayer and 
intercession, in the cultivation 
of a spirit of charity, and in 
seeking to diffuse throughevery 
part of the Christian com- 
munity that desire and reso- 
lution to return to the faith and 
discipline of the undivided 
Church which was the principle 
of the English Reformation.” 

1 See 1 Eliz. c. i. xxxvi. 


As ultimately carried. 

“We, Bishops of Christ’s 
Holy Catholic Church, in visible 
Communion with the United 
Church of Englandand Ireland, 
professing the faith delivered 
to us in Holy Scripture, main- 
tained by the primitive Church 
and by the Fathers of the 
English Reformation, now as- 
sembled bythe good providence 
of God, at the Archiepiscopal 
Palace of Lambeth, under the 
presidency of the Primate of 
all England, desire, first, to 
give hearty thanks to Almighty 
God for having thus brought us 
together for common counsels 
and united worship ; secondly, 
we desire to express the deep 
sorrow with which we view the 
divided condition of the flock 
of Christ throughout the world, 
ardently longing for the fulfil- 
ment of the prayer of our Lord: 
‘That all may be one, as Thou, 
Father, art in me, and 1 in 
Thee, that they also may be 
one in us, that the world may 
believe that Thou has sent 
me’; and, lastly, we do here 
solemnly record our conviction 
that unity will be most effec- 
tually promoted, by maintain- 
ing the faith in its purity and 
integrity, as taught in the Holy 
Scriptures, held by the primi- 
tive Church, summed up in the 
Creeds, and affirmed by the 
undisputed General Councils, 
and by drawing each of us 
closer to our common Lord, 
by giving ourselves to much 
prayer and intercession, by the 
cultivation ofa spirit ef charity, 
and a love of the Lord’s appear- 

16 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

On the second day—Wednesday, September 25 
—the president consented, notwithstanding the 
strenuous protest of several bishops, to a complete 
change of programme, in accordance with the wish 
of the Bishop of Capetown and others, and the 
discussions were thus diverted into an unexpected 
channel. A long day was occupied in discussing 
the due gradation of synodal authority, diocesan, 
provincial, and perhaps patriarchal, within the 
Anglican Communion. After the failure of succes- 
sive attempts to obtain the formal sanction of the Con- 
ference to the definite schemes proposed, it was found 
necessary to fall back upon a perfectly general reso- 
lution proposed by Bishop Selwyn, of New Zealand, 
in the following terms :—“ That, in the opinion of 
this Conference, unity of faith and discipline will be 
best maintained among the several branches of the 
Anglican Communion by due and canonical subor- 
dination of the synods of the several branches to 
the higher authority of a synod or synods above 
them.” : 

This was carried ze. con.,and a committee was 
appointed to consider the whole subject. 

On the following day (Thursday, Sept. 26), the 
“burning question ” of Bishop Colenso’s position was 
the subject of prolonged debate. The Archbishop 
of Canterbury had declined to allow any distinct 
resolution of condemnation to be put to the Confer- 
ence, and he ruled out of order a motion to that 
effect which was proposed by the Presiding Bishop 
of the American Church. After several hours dis- 
cussion, it was resolved, by 49 votes to Io, “that, in 
the judgment of the bishops here assembled, the 
whole Anglican Communion is deeply injured by 
the present condition of the Church in Natal ; and 
that a committee be now appointed at this general 
meeting to report on the best mode by which the 

1 See Part II., No. VI., p. 33. 

Encyclical Address to the Faithful. 17 

Church may be delivered from the continuance of 
this scandal, and the truth maintained. That such 
report be forwarded to his Grace the Lord Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury with the request that his Grace 
will be pleased to transmit the same to all the 
_ bishops of the Anglican Communion, and to ask for 
their judgment thereon.” 

The next matter dealt with was the possible con- 
stitution of what was described as a Spiritual Court 
of Appeal ; and on this subject it was found neces- 
sary, after long debate, to await the report of a 
committee before any formal recommendation could 
be made. Such a committee was accordingly ap- 
pointed “to consider the constitution of a voluntary 
spiritual tribunal, to which questions of doctrine may 
be carried by appeal from the tribunals for the exercise 
of discipline in each Province of the Colonial 

It had, upon the previous day, been informally 
decided that a short “ Encyclical” Letter or Address 
should be drafted by a Committee! for the signa- 
ture of the Bishops attending the Conference. ‘This 
Address was adopted by the whole body before the 
adjournment on Thursday evening, and was formally 
signed at the morning session on the following day.’ 
It was suggested in the Conference that it should be 
publicly read by the Archbishop from the altar of 
Lambeth Parish Church; but this course was not 
adopted. After other resolutions? had been carried 
with respect to the due notification of the establish- 
ment of new dioceses, the provision of Letters Com- 
mendatory, and the proper measure of publicity to 

1 The Committee consisted of the Archbishop of Canterbury 
and the Bishops of London, Winchester, Oxford, North 
Carolia, Grahamstown, Ohio, Ely, St. Andrews, Cape Town, 
Moray and Ross, and New Zealand. 

* The complete document, as signed, is given below. 
Part II., No. VIL, p. 88. 

* See Part II., No. ΙΧ. p. 98. 

18 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

be given to the proceedings of the Conference, 
a second and unexpected debate arose upon the 
position of Bishop Colenso, and a resolution was 
carried expressing the acquiescence of the Confe- 
rence in certain advice given by the Convocation of 
‘Canterbury a year before, respecting the steps to be 
taken “if it be decided that a New Bishop should 
be consecrated” for the Diocese of Natal. 

After the Gloria in Excelsis had been sung by the 
assembled Bishops, the Primate dismissed the Con- 
ference with the Benediction, on the understanding 
that those members of it who could remain in 
England should reassemble in December to receive 
the Reports of the various Committees. 

On the following day, Saturday, September 28, 
thirty-four Bishops attended a closing service in 
Lambeth Parish Church, when the Holy Communion 
was celebrated by the Archbishop, and a sermon 
was preached by Bishop Fulford, of Montreal. It 
had originally been proposed that this service should 
be held in Westminster Abbey; but Dean Stanley, 
in a correspondence published at the time,! gave his 
reasons for objecting to the use of the Abbey in the 
manner proposed, and the Conference fell back on 
Lambeth Church as an alternative. 

The several Committees were in frequent session 
during the next two months under the direction of 
Bishop Selwyn, of New Zealand ;? Bishop Fulford, 
of Montreal; and Bishop Cotterill, of Grahamstown, 
the last-named of whom had undertaken the 
onerous work of “ Secretary of Committees” to the 

On December 10 a further session of the Con- 
ference, or such members of it as had remained in 

1 See Part II., No. X., p. ror. 

2 Bishop Selwyn had been nominated in November, 1867, to 
the See of Lichfield ; but he was not enthroned till January 9, 

The Adjourned Session: December, 1867. 19 

England, was held at Lambeth Palace, when eight 
Reports were presented.!. With reference to the first 
seven of these, a resolution was in each case formally 
passed : “That this adjourned meeting of the Con- 
ference receives the Report (No. —) of the Com- 
mittee now presented, and directs the publication 
thereof, commending it to the careful consideration 
of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion, as 
containing the result of the deliberations of that 
Committee; and returns the members of the 
same its thanks for the care with which they have 
considered the various important questions referred 
to them.” 

Upon the presentation of Report No. VIII., which 
referred to Bishop Colenso’s deposition, it was re- 
solved “that the Report be received and printed ; 
that the thanks of this meeting be given to the Com- 
mittee for their labours, and that his Grace be 
requested to communicate the Report to the Council 
of the Colonial Bishoprics Fund.” 

The further resolutions, which will be found in 
full elsewhere,” were for the most part of a formal 
character. It was, indeed, impossible, considering 
the small number of Bishops who were able to 
attend, that any important motions should at this 
stage be brought before them. The session lasted 
for a few hours only, and it became evident that in 
any future Conference some different arrangement 
must be adopted. Reiterated thanks were expressed 
to the Bishops of Gloucester and Grahamstown, the 
Episcopal Secretaries ; and to Mr. Philip Wright and 
Mr. Isambard Brunel, who had acted as their lay 
assistants and advisers. “The Conference had been 
attended, in all, by seventy-six Bishops out of one 
hundred and forty-four who had received invitations. 
Of these seventy-six, eighteen were English Bishops, 

* See Part II., No. XIL., p. r1o. 
* See Part II., No. XIIL, p. 136. 

20 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878. 

five were Irish, and six were Scotch. The Colonial 
Church sent twenty-four, including five Metropolitans. 
The United States sent nineteen. At no one session 
of the Conference were all the Bishops present, but 
the Encyclical Address received the signatures of all, 
and the President was subsequently authorised to 
affix the names of several others who had been re- 
luctantly prevented from attending.! 


HE circumstances in which the first Conference 

had been held were exceptionally difficult, and 

some of the interests at stake were of so keen and 
even personal a sort that the Bishops found it hard 
to give undistracted attention to the wider questions 
of policy and practice which had been included in 
Archbishop Longley’s programme. The allotted 
time also had been far too short for dealing ade- 
quately with such subjects. Eight Committees had 
indeed reported ; but their Reports, as has been seen, 
were presented to less than a score of Bishops at 
one brief session on a single day. | Due discussion 
of them was thus impossible, and Bishop Selwyn, 
who had been foremost perhaps among the promoters 

1 See Part II., No. XIII., p. 138. 

A Second Conference asked for. 21 

of the gathering, could only suggest the postpone- 
ment to a future Conference of any debate upon 
these weighty documents.! 

The inquiry soon became common, Will there be 
a second Conference, and if so, when? ' Once again, 
as in 1865, it was the Canadian Church which took 
the first .official step. In December, 1872, the 
Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Canada 
made formal appeal to the Convocation of Canter- 
bury to join with them in a request to Archbishop 
Tait, who had in 1869 succeeded to the Primacy, 
that he would summon as soon as possible a second 
meeting of the Conference.’ 

Taking this Canadian letter as his text, Bishop 
Selwyn, in a memorable speech in Convocation, 
endorsed and expanded the appeal. He had visited 
America in 1871. He was to pay a second and more 
formal visit in 1874, and his experience in every part 
of the world led him to long for such confederation 
and unity of action as could, he believed, be best 
secured by a second Conference, or, as he called it, 
“ A General Council of the Bishops of the Anglican 
Communion, to carry on the work begun by the 
Lambeth Conference of 1867,” 

The matter was, by common consent, adjourned 
for a time ; and in the following year (1874) Bishop 
Kerfoot, of Pittsburgh, as representing the American 
Church, was in constant communication upon the 
subject with Archbishop Tait, whom he visited at 
Addington, and to whom he was authorised to write 
officially from America.t The Bishop of Lichfield’s 
formal attendance in that year at the meetings, first 

1 See eg., Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 13, 1873, 
p. 172. 

2 See Part II., No. XIV., p. 139. 

% See Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 13, 1873, pp. 

* See Part II., No. XV., p.141, and “Life of Bishop Kerfoot,” 
vol. ii., pp. 581-587. 

22 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

of the Provincial Synod of Canada and then of the 
General Convention in New York,' brought the 
question again into prominence, and it had now 
become practically certain that a second Conference 
would be held in 1877 or 1878 if the necessary con- 
ditions could be agreed upon. 

Some of these conditions were suggested by the 
Canadian House of Bishops ;” others were laid down 
by the Archbishop himself in an important Con- 
vocation speech, and in his written reply to a formal 
request signed by no less than 42 Bishops of the 
American Church.? Speaking in Convocation on 
April 16, 1875, he said :— 

“No one can doubt that very great good has 
arisen from the friendly intercourse which took place 
during the last Lambeth Conference. At the same 
time, it must be remembered that it is a serious. 
matter to gather the Bishops together from all parts 
of the globe, unless there is some distinct object for 
their so gathering. I therefore am disposed, by the 
advice of my brethren, to request that our brethren 
at home, and also those at a distance, will state to 
me as explicitly as possible what the subjects are that 
it is desirable to discuss at such meeting. They are 
of a somewhat limited character. There is no inten- 
tion whatever on the part of anybody to gather 
together the Bishops of the Anglican Church for the 
sake of defining any matter of doctrine. Our doc- 
trines are contained in our formularies, and our 
formularies are interpreted by the proper judicial 
authorities, and there is no intention whatever at any 
such gathering that questions of doctrine should be 
submitted for interpretation in any future Lambeth 
Conference any more than they were at the previous 
Lambeth Conference. My predecessor had a very 

' See “ Life of Bishop Selwyn,” vol. ii., pp. 319-324. 
2 See Part II., No. XVLI., p. 148. 
° See Part ΝΟ XV., p. 144. 

Archbishop Taits Speech in Convocation. 23 

difficult. task in defining the exact duty of the 
Bishops who came together on the former occasion, 
and with great firmness, and at the same time with 
that remarkable courtesy and kindliness for which he 
was so eminent, he steered the somewhat difficult 
course which was before him, and it was distinctly 
settled that matters of that kind were not to be 
entered upon. Well, then, with regard to discipline, 
of course our discipline is exercised by ourselves 
and by the constituted Courts of the Church at 
home, and the discipline of the various Colonial and 
more independent Churches is exercised by these 
Churches according to fixed rules which have been 
established by themselves, and we have no intention 
whatever of interfering with these matters of dis- 
cipline. We are, therefore, perhaps naturally, anxious 
to know tolerably distinctly the subjects which any 
would wish to bring before us..... Friendly inter- 
course must, of course, be of great value. But it is 
possible that Bishops at a very great distance—such 
as the Bishop of Athabasca, who, I believe, can 
scarcely reach his diocese under a year—might per- 
haps, under a misapprehension, think it was neces- 
sarily their duty to come to such a Conference unless 
it was distinctly stated what was to be done..... 
I cannot doubt that there are many points respecting 
the connection between the Mother Church and the 
Colonial Churches on which a friendly Conference 
would be very valuable indeed. ....... With 
regard to our brethren in America, no such difficulties 
exist: what we enjoyed so much during the late 
Conference was the friendly intercourse and exchange 
of sentiment between us and them. We have no 
desire to interfere with their affairs, and I am sure 
they have no desire to interfere with ours. As far as 
they are concerned, I think it would be a work of 
love in which we should be engaged—the extension 
of Christ’s kingdom—and that we may be able by 
friendly intercourse to strengthen each other’s hands 

24 Lambeth Conference 07 1878. 

But I think it important that there should be no mis- 
understanding, and none of that difficulty which, I 
am bound to say, did exist at the last Lambeth 
Conference as to what subjects might and what 
subjects might not be introduced ; that we should 
know what it is that our brethren wish to bring 
before us, and what we wish to bring before them, 
before they give themselves the trouble of coming 
from the ends of the earth, happy as the results of 
such a meeting are, under God’s Providence, likely 
bo ‘be.” 

Fortified by the concurrence of the Northern Con- 
vocation,” which had held aloof in 1867, the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury issued a formal letter on 
March 28th, 1876, to all the Bishops of the Anglican 
Communion, intimating his readiness to hold a Con- 
ference in 1878, “if it shall seem expedient, after the 
opinions of all our brethren have been ascertained,” 
and inviting an expression of opinion. These letters 
to the Bishops throughout the world were not, as 
heretofore, sent direct from Lambeth ; but were for- 
warded to the various Metropolitans and presiding 
Bishops, with a request that they would transmit 
them officially to the Bishops entitled to receive 
them in each branch or Province of the Church—a 
rule which has since been followed in all similar 
circulars of an official kind. 

Before the close of the year about ninety letters 
of reply were received by the Archbishop, from all 
parts of the world, showing, as had been anticipated, 
an overwhelming preponderance of opinion in favour 
of a second Conference, provided a longer period of 
session could be arranged for than “the four short 
days” of 1867. 

1 See Chronicle of Convocation, April 16, 1875, pp. 

* For the formal resolution passed in the Convocation of 
York on Feb. 26, 1875, see Part II., No. XVII., p. 150. 

Ξ See Part II., No. XVIII, p. 151. 

A rchbishop Tait’s Invitation. 25 

Most of the Bishops also suggested subjects for 
discussion, and on these the Archbishop took counsel 
with an Episcopal Committee, and especially with 
Bishop Selwyn. After the fullest deliberation, the 
following definite invitation was issued :— 

July 10, 1877. 


It is proposed to hold a Conference of Bishops of 
the Anglican Communion, at this place, beginning 
on Tuesday, the second day of July, eighteen hundred 
and seventy-eight. 

The Conference, it is proposed, shall extend over 
four weeks; the first week, of Four Sessions, to be 
devoted to discussions, in Conference, of the subjects 
submitted for deliberation; the second and third 
weeks to the consideration of these subjects in 
Committees ; and the fourth week to final discussions 
in Conference, and to the close of the meeting. 

The subjects seiected for discussion are the fol- 
lowing :— 

_ I. The best mode of maintaining Union among 
the various churches of the Anglican Communion. 

2. Voluntary Boards of Arbitration for Churches 
to which such an arrangement may be applicable. 

3. The relations to each other of Missionary 
Bishops and of Missionaries, in various branches of 
the Anglican Communion acting in the same 

4. The position of Anglican Chaplains and Chap- 
laincies on the Continent of Europe and elsewhere. 

5. Modern forms of infidelity, and the best means 
of dealing with them. . 

6. The condition, progress, and needs of the various 
Churches of the Anglican Communion. 

I shall feel greatly obliged if, at your early con-_ 
venience, you will inform me whether we may have 


26 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

the pleasure of expecting your presence at the 
I am, 
Right Reverend and dear Brother, 
Yours faithfully in Christ, 


It was evidently not without intention that the 
subjects selected for discussion, though grouped 
under such all-embracing headings, coincided in 
some parts so closely with the Resolutions of the 
Conference of 1867. The Reports presented in that 
year had never, as has been seen, received adequate 
discussion, nor had any one of them been “adopted” 
by the Conference. By a recurrence to these sub- 
jects a certain measure of continuity was secured, 
and a basis was laid for the practical deliberations 
of 1878. The plan adopted in 1867 of drafting and 
publishing beforehand the Resolutions which were 
to be moved, had not worked altogether well, and it 
was arranged that in 1878 the formal motion should 
in each case be for the appointment of a Committee 
which, after considering some branch of the selected 
subjects, should report to the Conference in its final 
week of session. 

One hundred and eight Bishops accepted the 
Archbishop’s invitation. Some of these, however, 
were at the last moment prevented from attending, 
and the actual number present at the Conference was 
exactly one hundred.! 

On Saturday, June 29, St. Peter's Day, the pro- 
ceedings of the Conference began with a gathering of 
Bishops at Canterbury, for what had been described 
as a “Service of Welcome” in the Cathedral. 

Archbishop Tait, four weeks before, had lost his 
only son, who had recently returned from a visit to 
America, and the fear that the Archbishop would 
himself be unable to attend the Service, which would 

1 See Part II., No. XXIII., page 204. 

The Welcome-at Canterbury. 27 

thus be deprived of much of its interest and com- 
pleteness, kept away many Bishops who had intended 
to be present. The Archbishop, however, went to 
Canterbury as arranged, and was met by thirty-six 
Bishops,! and an immense gathering of clergy. 

A service was held in the morning in St. Augus- 
tine’s Missionary College, with a sermon by Bishop 
Cleveland Coxe, of Western New York, and at the 
Special Evensong in the Cathedral at three o’clock, 
the Archbishop gave an official welcome to the 
assembled Bishops. The ancient marble throne, 
known as “St. Augustine’s Chair,” was moved from 
its ordinary position in the south transept, and placed 
in the centre of the altar steps. The Bishops were 
grouped on either side of it, and the Archbishop 
addressed them as follows :— 

“My brothers, representatives of the Church 
throughout the world, engaged in spreading the 
Gospel of Jesus Christ wherever the sun shines, I 
esteem it a very high privilege to welcome you here 
to-day, to the cradle of Anglo-Saxon Christianity. . . 
I am addressing you from St. Augustine’s chair. 
This thought carries us back to the time when that 
first missionary to our Anglo-Saxon forefathers, 
amid much discouragement, landed on these _bar- 
barous shores. More than twelve centuries and 
a-half have rolled on since then. The seed he sowed 
has borne an abundant harvest, and this great British 
nation, and our sister beyond the ocean, have cause 
to render thanks to God for the work begun by him 
here. And how full of encouragement to you is St. 
Augustine’s work. What difficulties greater than 
those that confronted him can stand in your path ? 
And you have blessings that he had not. You stand 
nearer the pure primitive Christianity of the Apostles. 
You have a motive power to touch the heart denied 

* Nearly all of these came from abroad. Only three of the 
home Diocesans were present. 


28 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

ἐν. ee The varied history of the Church has 
recorded many failures and many successes, and we 
learn from the past neither to be elated by the one 
nor discouraged by the other. The monuments 
which surround us speak of a chequered history. 
They tell of dark times and of great times. But 
they all testify to the superintending power of God, 
Who works all things according to the pleasure of 
His will, after His own plan for the building up of 

His one Kingdom in His own way............ 
It is my privilege to welcome you to Christ 
Church, Canterbury... .. Gregory sent St. Augus- 

tine here that he might mark England with the name 
of Christ, “that Name which is above every name.” 
God grant that that Name may be ever more and 
more acknowledged among us; that its glories may 
shine more and more brightly here, and in your dis- 
tant dioceses, triumphing over all obstacles, and 
reconciling all petty divisions, uniting all hearts in 
the truth of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. 
My Brethren from across the Atlantic,—you espe- 
cially from the great Republic,—to you a particular 
welcome is due from me. Partly for our Church’s 
sake, partly for my sake, partly also for something 
you discerned in himself, you welcomed one very 
dear to me last autumn.!. The bond that unites us 
is not the less sacred because so many hopes of 
earthly joy have withered and disappeared. God 
unite us all more closely in His own great Family. 
And now let us to prayer.” 

At eleven o’clock, on Tuesday, July 2, the Bishops 
met at Lambeth. They were marshalled in the 
Guard-room, where the actual Sessions of 1867 had 
been held, and passed thence in procession to the 
Chapel, the Bishops from the United States walking 
alongside of the English Diocesan Bishops as their 

1 The Archbishop’s son, the Rev. Craufurd Tait, had been 

formally welcomed by the House of Bishops assembled at 
Boston on Oct. 5, 1877. 

Opening of the Second Conference. 29 

guests, all due precedence being given in the proces- 
sional arrangements to the Metropolitans and pre- 
siding Bishops.!. After the Venz Creator had been 
sung, the Holy Communion was celebrated by the 
Archbishop of Canterbury, assisted by the Bishops 
of London, Winchester, Salisbury, and Rochester, as 
officers of the Provincial College. With the excep- 
tion of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Chaplains,” 
none but Bishops were present in the Chapel. The 
sermon was preached by the Archbishop of York, 
the text being Galatians ii. 11: “ But when Peter was 
come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because 
he was to be blamed.” 

The Sessions of the Conference were held in the 
Great Library,not,as in 1867,in the Guard-room. The 
arrangement of hours and subjects was as follows :— 

(11am. Holy Communion and sermon 
in Lambeth Palace Chapel. 
Tuesday, 1.30 p.m. Archbishop’sopening address, 

July 2. +2 pm—445 pm. Subject /.— The 
best mode of maintaining union 
among the various Churches of 
4 the Anglican Communion. 

(10.30a.m. Litany in Chapel. 

Iram. Sudzect //—Voluntary Boards 
of Arbitration for Churches to 
which such an arrangement may 

Wednesday, be applicable. 

July 3. + 1.30 pm. Subject JJ//.—The relation 
to each other of Missionary 

Bishops and of Missionaries in 

various Branches of the Anglican 

Communion, acting in the same 

4 country. 

' See Part II., No. XXIV., p. 206. 

* Archdeacon Fisher, Rev. F. G. Blomfield, Hon. and Rev. 
W. H. Fremantle, Rev. W. F. Erskine Knollys, Rev. Randall 
T. Davidson. 

$ See Part II., No. XX., p. 154. 

30 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

(10.30 a.m. Litany in Chapel. 

Iram. Swdzect /V.—The position of 
Anglican Chaplains and Chap- 

Thursday, laincies on the Continent of 

, Europe and elsewhere. | 

1.30 p.m. Szbject V.i—Modern forms 
of Infidelity, and the best means 

Y of dealing with them. 

(10.30am. Litany in Chapel. 
Friday, | 11am. andi.3op.m. Sudject Vl— 
July 5. 4 The condition, progress, and needs 
| of the various Churches of the 
@ Anglican Communion. 

It was decided, almost unanimously, that the pro- 
ceedings of the Conference should, as in 1867, be 
private. A shorthand report was made of all the 
speeches, and it was arranged that this should be 
preserved by the Archbishop along with the other 
manuscripts belonging to Lambeth Library, but 
should in no way be made public.' 

The secretarial work of the Conference was again, 
as in 1867, under the charge of Bishops Ellicott and 
Cotterill,? assisted by Dr. Isambard Brunel, and, 
unofficially, by the Archbishop’s resident Chaplain.* 
For the avoidance of discussions irrelevant to the 
programme it was arranged, with general consent, 
that if any memorials or petitions—and there were 
not a few—should be forwarded to the Conference, 
they should be placed, without further remark than 
a bare statement of their purport, in the hands of the 

1 A long account of the debates which had taken place in 
1867 was unexpectedly published in the Guardian of June 19, 
1878, under circumstances explained in a letter from the 
Rev. W. Benham to the Archbishop, which appeared in the 
Guardian of the following week, June 26, 1878, p. goo. 

2 Bishop of Grahamstown 1856-1871 ; Bishop of Edinburgh 
~ § The Rey. R. T, Davidson. 

The Conference Committees : 1878. 31 

President, and that the memorialists should be 
informed that in no case could any answer be 

In the opening debates during the first week the 
formal motion was in each case for the appointment 
of a Committee to consider the particular subject 
under discussion, and to report to the Conference 
during the closing week of Session. On the final 
and very wide subject—(No. VI.)—“ The condition, 
progress, and needs of the various Churches of the 
Anglican Communion,” the order was varied by 
the appointment of an influential Committee presided 
over by the Archbishop of Canterbury, which sat 
de die in diem at Lambeth, “to receive questions 
submitted in writing by Bishops desiring the advice 
of the Conference on difficulties or problems they 
have met with in their several Dioceses.” 

The various Committees met at Lambeth, Fulham, 
Farnham, and elsewhere during the fortnight which 
intervened between the first and last groups of 
Sessions, and their Reports were, for the most part, 
ready when the Conference re-assembled in Lambeth 
Library on Monday, July 22nd. Onsubject No. V. 
alone—* Modern forms of Infidelity, and the best 
means of dealing with them,’—the Committee, as 
was natural, announced that they had not found it 
possible to prepare in the time allotted for their 
deliberations a detailed Report upon 80. vast a 
question. ‘To judge, however, from the published 
opinions of the Bishops present at the Conference! 
the debates upon this subject were among the most 
useful of any that took place. 

As the outcome of much discussion it was decided 
that the Reports, when adopted by the Conference, 
should be incorporated as a whole in a combined 

' See, for example, “‘The Second Lambeth Conference: A 
Personal Narrative,” by Bishop Stevens Perry, of Iowa, 
pp. 27, &c. 

32 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

“ Letter,” and put forth to the world in the name of 
the hundred Bishops assembled. This course was 
rendered possible by the almost complete unanimity 
with which the five Reports in their ultimate shape 
received the imprimatur of the Conference. Bishop 
Wordsworth of Lincoln, who, as Archdeacon of 
Westminster, had in 1867 translated into Greek and 
Latin the Address then published! undertook in like 
manner to make translations of this document of 
1878, condensing or omitting such portions of the 
Reports as would be inappropriate or uninteresting 
to those outside the Anglican Communion.? 

The final paragraphs of the official letter, which 
will be found in its complete form elsewhere,’ were as 
follows :— 

“These are the Reports of the Conference, and the 
practical conclusions at which we have arrived. 
Some of these conclusions have reference to the 
special circumstances of different branches of the 
One Church of Christ, according to peculiarities of 
their various missionary work for the heathen, or 
their labours among their own people ; some embody 
principles which apply to all-branches of the Church 
Universal. They are all limited in their scope to 
those subjects which have been distinctly brought 
before the assembled Bishops. We invite to them 
the attention of the various Synods and other 
governing powers in the several Churches, and of all 
the faithful in Christ Jesus throughout the world. 

“We do not claim to be lords over God’s heritage, 
but we commend the results of this our Conference 
to the reason and conscience of our brethren as en- 
lightened by the Holy Spirit of God, praying that 
all throughout the world who call upon the Lord 
Jesus Christ may be of one mind, may be united in 

' See Part II., No. VIIL, p. 92. 
2 See Part II., No. XXII., p. 191. 
* See Part II., No. XXI. p. 163. 

Closing Service in St. Paul’s Cathedral. 33 

one fellowship, may hold fast the Faith once delivered 
to the Saints, and worship their one Lord in the 
spirit of purity and love. 

“ Signed on behalf of the Conference, 

The Letter having been thus formally signed, the 
Gloria in Excelsis was sung by the assembled 
Bishops, the Benediction was pronounced, and the 
deliberations of the Conference were at an end. 

On the following day (Saturday, July 27) a grand 
closing service was held in St. Paul’s Cathedral. The 
Bishops who were able to be present—about eighty- 
five in number—received the Archbishop of Canter- 
bury at the West door, and the hymn, “ The Church’s 
One Foundation,” was sung as the long procession 
walked up thenave. The Ze Deum! followed, and the 
Holy Communion was then celebrated by the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury, who was assisted in the service 
and administration by the Bishops of London, Moray 
and Ross, Sydney, Montreal, Christ Church (New 
Zealand), Capetown, Rupertsland, and Delaware. 
The sermon was preached by Bishop Stevens, of 
Pennsylvania, from the text, “I, if I be lifted up 
from the earth, will draw all men unto Me” (St. 
John xii. 32).2. The service over, the Bishops 
assembled in the apse of the Cathedral, when a few 
farewell words were spoken by the Archbishop. “I 
feel confident,” he said, “ that the effect of our gather- 
ing will be that the Church at home and abroad will 
be strengthened by the mutual counsel which we 
have taken together. May the blessing of Almighty 
God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost 
attend each one of us in our several spheres when 
we depart from this place. On behalf of the Bishops 

1 Stainer in E flat. 
* See Part II., No. XXV., p. 208. 

34. Lambeth Conferences of 1878 and 1888. 

of England I offer to those of our brethren who have 
come hither from foreign lands our heartfelt thanks, 
and bid them, in the name of God, Farewell!” 

So ended the second Lambeth Conference. It had 
been attended, as has been seen, by exactly one 
hundred Bishops. Thirty-five of these were English,! 
nine were Irish, seven were Scottish, thirty were 
Colonial and Missionary, and nineteen belonged to 
the Church of the United States.” The expenses of 
the Conference, so far as they did not devolve upon 
the Archbishop of Canterbury, were defrayed by the 
English Diocesan Bishops. A committee of laymen, 
under the guidance of Mr. J. G. Talbot, M.P., under- 
took to arrange for all possible hospitality to the 
American and Colonial Bishops. This organization, 
however, as well as the visits paid to the English 
Universities and Cathedral cities, lay altogether out- 
side the official arrangements for the Conference. 


T was virtually settled at the Conference of 1878. 
that a third Conference should be held at 
Lambeth, ten years later, and the death of Arch- 
bishop Tait,on December 3, 1882, made no difference 
in these arrangements. 

- 1 Namely, two Archbishops, twenty-six English Diocesans, 
three Bishops Suffragan, and four ex-Colonial Bishops holding 
‘*Commissions” in England. 

2 For the numbers attending the Conference of 1867, see 
above, page 19. 

Invitation to the Conference of 1888. 35 

In July, 1886, Archbishop Benson issued the 
following formal letter, which was sent, as on pre- 
vious occasions, through the various Metropolitans 
and Presiding Bishops, to all members of the 
Anglican Episcopate “exercising superintendence 
over Dioceses, or lawfully commissioned to exercise 
Episcopal functions therein ” :— 


“There appears to be a general desire that a Con- 
ference of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion 
should again be held at Lambeth within the next 
few years. 

“T have accordingly decided (following the prece- 
dents of 1867 and 1878) to issue next year an invi- 
tation to such a Conference, which would assemble, 
according to our present plan, in the summer of 1888. 

“Tt will be of material assistance to myself and to 
those who are good enough to co-operate with me 
in making the necessary arrangements, if you can, 
at your early convenience, inform me whether it 
seems to you probable that you will be able to take 
part in our deliberations, and whether there are any 
subjects of general importance which appear to you 
specially appropriate for discussion in the Conference. 

“T am in hopes that the suggestions which may 
reach me in answer to this circular letter will enable 
me to issue, next spring, the formal invitations to 
the Conference, together with an intimation as to the 
definite subjects which will, in the following year, 
come before us for discussion. 

“1 have made these preliminary arrangements in 
conjunction with the Archbishop of York and the 
English Bishops, and I am glad to be able to inform 
you that the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol, whose 
efficient aid as hon. Episcopal Secretary both in 
1867 and 1878 will be gratefully remembered, has 
again kindly consented to act in that capacity. We 

36 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

have associated with him as Hon. Assistant Secretary 
the Dean of Windsor, who, as resident chaplain to 
Archbishop Tait, was responsible for many of the 
arrangements of the Conference of 1878. 

“Tt is not necessary that I should assure you of 
our earnest desire that you will unite with us in 
humble prayer to Almighty God that His guidance 
and blessing may be vouchsafed in rich measure, 
both to our ultimate deliberations and to the arrange- 
ments necessary to secure their efficiency. 

“1 remain, 
“Your faithful Brother and Servant in Christ, 

In the twenty years that had elapsed since the first 
Conference, the number of Bishops entitled to 
receive an invitation had increased from 144 to 200, 
and nine more were added before the third Conference 
actually assembled. Most of the Bishops, in replying, 
suggested subjects for discussion, and these sugges- 
tions were examined with the utmost care by the 
Archbishop. of Canterbury, and by other Bishops 
whose assistance he invited. The result of this 
examination was the following formal letter, sent 
through the Metropolitans as before :— 

“ἐ oth November, 1888. 


“Tam now able to send you definite information 
with regard to the Conference of Bishops of the 
Anglican Communion to be held at Lambeth, if God 
permit, in the summer of next year. 

“In accordance with the precedent of 1878, it has 
been arranged that the Conference shall assemble on 
Tuesday, July 3rd, 1888. After four days’ session 
there will be an adjournment, in order that the 
various Committees appointed by the Conference 

Programme of the Third Conference. 37 

may have opportunity of deliberation. The Con- 
ference will re-assemble on Monday, July 23rd, or 
Tuesday, July 24th, and will conclude its session on 
Friday, July 27th. 

“ Information as to the Services to be held in con- 
nection with the Conference, and other particulars 
will be made public as the time draws near. 

“JT have received valuable suggestions from my 
Episcopal brethren in all parts of the world as to the 
subjects upon which it is thought desirable that we 
should deliberate. 

“These suggestions have been carefully weighed 
by myself and by the Bishops who have been good 
enough to co-operate with me in making the pre- 
liminary arrangements, and the following are the 
subjects definitely selected for discussion :— 

“J, The Church’s practical work in relation to (A) 
Intemperance, (B) Purity, (Ὁ) Care of Emigrants, 
(D) Socialism. 

“TI. Definite Teaching of the Faith to various 
classes, and the means thereto. 

“III. The Anglican Communion in relation to the 
Eastern Churches, to the Scandinavian and other 
Reformed Churches, to the Old Catholics, and 
others. . 

“TV. Polygamy of heathen converts. Divorce. 

“V. Authoritative standards of Doctrine and 

“VI. Mutual relations of Dioceses and Branches of 
the Anglican Communion. 

“May I venture again to invite your earnest 
prayer that the Divine Head of the Church may be 
pleased to prosper with His blessing this our 
endeavour to promote His glory, and the advance- 
ment of His Kingdom upon earth. 

“1 remain, 
“Your faithful Brother and Servant in Christ, 

38 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

No less than 147 Bishops signified their intention 
of being present at the Conference. One of these died 
after accepting the invitation.! Three others were at 
the last moment prevented from leaving their Dioceses. 
On the other hand, two Bishops were consecrated 3 
during the actual month of Conference, and the total 
number who took part in its deliberations was thus 
145. This was proportionally a much larger at- 
tendance than at either of the previous Conferences. 
In 1867, 144 Bishops were invited, and 76 attended. 
In 1878, 173 were invited, and 100 attended. In 
1888, 211 were invited, and 145 attended. | 

The official proceedings began, as in 1878, witha 
service held at Canterbury, on Saturday, June 30. 
After hospitable entertainment in St. Augustine’s 
Missionary College, the Bishops assembled and robed 
in the Chapter-house, and walked in procession 
through the cloisters to the great west door of the 
Cathedral, where they were received by the Arch- 
bishop, and by the Cathedral Clergy. The Arch- 
bishop was attended by his Chaplains, but the ar- 
rangements as to space in the choir of the Cathedral 
did not admit of such attendance in the case of the 
other Bishops. As the long procession, including, 
besides the Bishops, the members of the Cathedral 
body, the City clergy, and the Mayor and Corpora- 
tion of Canterbury, moved up the nave and 
choir, Psalm Ixviii. was chanted, and the hymn 
“Onward, Christian Soldiers,’ sung. The Bishops, 
about a hundred in number, were ranged on either 
side upon the altar-steps, and the Archbishop took 
his place in St. Augustine’s Chair, which had once 
again been placed for the purpose in the centre of 
the altar-steps. The Ze Dezm having been chanted, 
the Archbishop, seated in his chair, delivered the 
following address :— 

1 The Bishop of Fond du Lac, U.S.A. 
2 The Bishops of Bedford and Leicester. 

Archbishop Benson's Address. 39 

“ Brethren most dear, and to me most reverend, few 
privileges of my office can surpass that which, though 
unworthy, I exercise to-day. It is to bid you welcome 
in the name of the Lord. Happy should my soul be 
if it were given me to take in all that such welcome 
means. Welcome from all continents, and seas, and 
shores, where the English tongue is spoken. 
Welcome, bearers of the great commission to be 
His witnesses unto the end of the earth. Welcome, . 
disciples of the great determination to ‘refuse fables,’ 
and seek the inspiration of the Church at the 
fountain-head of inspired reason. Welcome to the 
chair, which, when filled least worthily, most takes 
up its own parable, and speaks of unbroken lines 
of government and law and faith, and forgets not 
the yet earlier Christianity of the land whose own 
lines soon flowed into and blended with the Romaii 
and the Gallic and the Saxon strains. Round this 
chair have clustered the glorious memorials you see 
through ages, none more dear than his who spoke 
from it last with a pathos and courage quite his own 
His simple words to you, our brethren of the great 
Republic, ‘the particular welcome from himself, 
which his great sorrow and your love privileged him 
to give you, still shed a tender human light upon the 
solemn matters we are to treat of, and the heavenly 
enterprises to which we and our successors are 
pledged. We know how dear to you is this sanctuary 
of our fathers and yours,—yes, of ‘your Father and 
our Father. And even because of the potency of 
its deep appeal to us to be holy in worship, pure in 
doctrine, strong in life—even for this appeal’s sake 
we bid you here rermnember the pregnant words of 
Gregory to Augustine himself, ‘Non pro locis res, 
sed pro bonis rebus loca amanda sunt.’ Love not the 
things for the sake of the genius of the place, love 
the place for the good things wrought there. This 
he said in answer to Augustine’s question—‘ The 
faith being one, are there different customs in 

40 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

different Churches?’ The answer was worthy of 
him who has been called the greatest of the Popes, 
and called the first of the Methodists. He says, you 
remember, ‘What thou hast found in any Church 
more pleasing to the Almighty God, that do thou 
solicitously choose out, and in the English Church, 
young in the faith, pour in with excellent instruction 
what thou gatherest from many Churches,’ For the ἡ 
moment, while his Church was young, Augustine 
stood in a strange, unique position, commissioned to 
represent in one person the very Church itself which 
sent him, and bound to represent the future Church 
for which he was responsible. Were not the words 
prophetic and characteristic? The task assigned him 
has surely fulfilled itself in the manifoldness of his 
Church, the embracingness, the comprehensiveness, 
and the integrity of her spirit—the versatility with 
which she enters into the life of new nations, the 
readiness with which she receives them to herself, 
the simplicity of the unvarying rule of her faith, yet 
the steadfastness of the claim she makes for other 
Churches, as well as for herself, that they may have 
liberty in things doubtful or indifferent. We honour 
her when we say she has all the right which the 
most venerable Churches have to order her service of 
God, as they did, “according to the diversities of 
countries, times, and men’s manners,” so that nothing 
be ordained against God’s word. We vindicate her 
dignity when we say the right is hers, not ours. 
It is for her to choose for’us, and not we for ourselves ; 
for her in her lasting power, not for us separately in 
our passing weakness. We honour her when we say 
that her right is the right of all Churches, and of no 
individuals. If this voice of Gregory to Augustine 
be worked into the fabric of our Church, it may well 
be the “sermon in stones” which we shall hear to- 
day as the last echoes of the service tremble along 
the arches, and seem to fancy’s ear to quiver with 
anxiety to leave one true tone with us for comfort 

Westminster Abbey Service, 1888. 41 

“and for strength. It is this,—liberty for all the holy 
_ Churches of God, loyal allegiance of Churchmen 
each to his own. 

Lastly, may He inspire and bless the work of all 
believers, be they Churchmen or no, who love the 
Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity and truth.” 

Evensong followed, the Anthem being Mendels- 
sohn’s “ The Sorrows of Death,” and the Hymn, 
“ The Church’s one Foundation.” As the great pro- 
cession moved outwards from the choir, the Arch- 
bishop pronounced the Benediction a second time | 
over the multitude assembled in the nave. 

A second great service was held in Westminster 
Abbey on Monday evening, July 2nd, when the 
Sermon was preached by the Archbishop of Canter- 
bury, who took for his text Ephesians iv. τό, “ All 
the body, fitly framed and knit together, through 
that which every joint supplieth.” ! 

Nearly all the Bishops who had accepted the invi- 

tation to the Conference were present at this service, 
each attended by his Chaplain. They were mar- . 
shalled in long procession at the west end of the 
nave, and during the service were seated in the choir 
and under the lantern, the general congregation 
occupying the transepts. The Archbishops and 
Metropolitans, with their Chaplains, had places 
assigned them in the sacrarium. The special Psalms 
and Lessons were: Psalms civ. cxlv. Isaiah xlix. 
1-24. Acts ii. 1-22. Sterndale Bennett’s Anthem, 
“God is a Spirit,’ and Bishop Cleveland Coxe’s 
Hymn, “ Saviour, sprinkle many Nations,” had also 
been specially chosen for the occasion. 

On the following morning, Tuesday, July 3rd, 
the Conference opened with a Celebration of Holy 
Communion in Lambeth Palace Chapel, the intro- 
ductory sermon or address being delivered by Bishop 

' See Part II., No. XXVIIL., page 228. 
a : 

42 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

Whipple, of Minnesota, who had been deputed to this 
office by the Presiding Bishop of America, at the 
request of the Archbishop of Canterbury. The 
closing sentences of the sermon ! were as follows :— 

“To none is this Council so dear as to those whose 
lives are spent in the darkness of heathenism, or who 
have gone out to new lands to lay foundation for 
- the work of the Church of God. In loneliness, with 
deferred hopes, neglected by brethren, your only 
refuge to cry as a child to God, it is a joy for you to 
feel the beating of a brother’s heart, and hear the 
music of a brother’s voice, and kneel with brothers at 
the dear old trysting-place, the Table of our Lord. 
Let us consecrate all we haveand are to Him ; let us 
remember loved ones far away; let us gather the 
work we have so long garnered in cur hearts and lay 
it at His feet. We shall not have met in vain if out 
of the love learned of Him we give each to other 
and to all fellow-labourers for Him a brother’s love, a 
brother’s sympathy, and a brother’s prayers. I do 
not know how to clothe in words the thronging 
memories which cluster round us in this holy place, 
what searchings of heart, what cries to God, what 
communions with Christ, what consolations of the 
Holy Spirit, have been witnessed in this sacred 
place. I cannot call over the long roll of saints, 
confessors, and martyrs, whose ‘names are written in 
the Lamb’s Book of Life. Two names will be re- 
membered to-day by us all. One that gentle Arch- 
bishop Longley, who in the greatness of his love saw 
with a prophet’s eye the mission of the Church, and 
planned these Conferences, that our hearts might beat 
as one in the battle of the last time. The other, the 
wisest of counsellors, and the most loving of brethren, 
the great-hearted Archbishop Tait, whose dying 
legacy to his brethren was ‘love one another. They 

1 See Part II., No. XXIX., page 241. 

Meeting of the Conference, 1888. 43 

have finished their course and entered into rest. A 
tittle more work, a few more trials, and we, too, shall 
finish our course. We are not two companies: the 
militant and triumphant are one. We are the 
advance and rear of one host, travelling to the 
Canaan of God’s rest. God grant that we, too, may 
so follow Christ that we may have an abundant 
entrance to His eternal kingdom.” 

The historic chapel was filled to overflowing by 
the Bishops in their robes, no one else being 
present, except the Chaplains of the Archbishop of 
Canterbury. He was himself the Celebrant, assisted 
by his Provincial Officers, the Bishops of London, 
Winchester, Rochester, Lincoln, and Salisbury. 

The order of procession adopted at all these ser- 
vices was the same, and was simpler than that of the 
former Conferences. Due precedence was given to 
* Archbishops, to Metropolitans and Presiding Bishops, 
and to the Bishops of London, Durham, and Win- 
chester, all other Bishops without distinction being 
arranged according to date of consecration.! 

The great Library had been prepared, as in 1878, 
for the sessions of the Conference, a low platform 
having on this occasion been specially erected, with 
places for the three Archbishops and the seven 
Metropolitans, in a semi-circle on either side of the 
President’s chair. 

The secretarial work was, for the third time, 
undertaken by the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol,? 
who was assisted by the Dean of Windsor,? and the 
Archdeacon of Maidstone,* the last-named having 
been added as Assistant-Secretary a few weeks 
before the Conference, owing to the unexpected 
pressure of correspondence. 

* See Part II., No. XXXI., page 256. 
2 The Right Rev. Ὁ. J. Ellicott, D.D. 
* The Very Rev. Randall T. Davidson, M.A. 
* The Ven. B. F. Smith, M.A. 

44 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

A shorthand writer, as on the two previous occa- 
sions, made a verbatim report of all the discussions 
for preservation at Lambeth. 

The proceedings during the first week of session 
followed exactly upon the lines laid down by Arch- 
bishop Tait in 1878. Certain speakers had been 
selected, specially qualified to open the several dis- 
cussions, the motion being in each case for the 
appointment of a Committee to consider the par- 
ticular subject, and to report to the Conference in its. 
closing week of session, Twelve such Committees 
were appointed in all, some of the subjects being, 
by general consent, divided into two, or varied 
in form from the wording of the official agenda 

A strong “Committee of Reference” was appointed 
in case any important questions, not covered by the 
programme, should be suggested, in the form of 
questions, for consideration and reply. But its work 
was light, and had reference mainly to the procedure 
of the Conference itself. In accordance with the. 
unanimous recommendation of this Committee, it was 
decided that no attempt should be made to secure the 
“adoption ” of the various Reports presented by the 
Committees, but that formal resolutions should in 
each case be moved by the several Chairmen. 

The memorials and petitions which arrived each 
day were notified to the Conference by the President’s 
direction, but it was made clear, as on former occa- 
sions, that no answer could in any case be returned. 

The Committees met frequently during the fort- 
night which intervened between the two weeks of 
full session. Some of them were accommodated in 
the newly-opened “ Church House,” in Dean’s Yard, 
which was thus put in its first days to one of the 
most important of the uses that its promoters had 
in view. Other Committees met at Lambeth, at 

1 See Part II., No. XXXV., page 285. 

Sessions of Conference, 1888. “45 

Farnham, at Ely, and at London House. When the 
Conference re-assembled on Monday, July 23rd, the 
Reports were all in print, and were circulated in 
time for the respective discussions. 

The substitution of carefully-worded resolutions 
in place of motions for the actual “adoption” of the 
several Reports worked very successfully. It was 
agreed that when any of the minority desired it, the 
numbers voting for and against the adoption of any 
of the resolutions ultimately carried should be made 
public. But in the case of three only, out of the 
thirty-two resolutions of the Conference,' was sucha 
request made. Resolutions or amendments lost on 
a division were not made public in any form. It was 
also decided that the Reports of the Committees, 
though not: formally adopted, should, unless other- 
wise decided by vote of Conference, be printed and 
circulated with the official resolutions. The names 
of the members of Committee were to be printed on 
the Reports, which were all, however, to be prefaced 
by a note, for the protection of minorities, pointing 
out that the Reports had not in all cases been 
unanimously adopted by the Committees responsible 
for them. 

The Archbishop of Canterbury was requested to 
draft, with such assistance as he might invite, an 
Encyclical Letter, embodying the results of the deli- 
berations of the Conference in a form suited for 
general circulation. This was done, and on the last 
day of session, Friday, July 27th, the draft Encyclical 
Letter was considered, paragraph by paragraph, and, 
after certain alterations had been made, the Arch- 
bishop was. requested, without one dissentient voice, 
to sign it on behalf of the Conference. An 
Address to the Queen,’ which had lain in the gallery 

1 Part Il., No. XXXIV., page 277. 
2 Part II., No. XXXIII., page 264. 
> Part II., No. XXX., page 252. 

46 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

for signature during the sessions of the Conference 
was formally read by the Archbishop, and the 
Conference closed with the Doxology and Bene- 

A solemn valedictory and thanksgiving service was 
held next day in St. Paul’s Cathedral. It was 
attended not only by the Bishops,! and their chap- 
lains, but by the Lower Houses of Convocation both 
of Canterbury and York, by the House of Lay- 
men of the Province of Canterbury, and by the legal 
and other officers of the Primate. All these walked 
in procession from the west door of the Cathedral to 
the choir. The service consisted of Holy Commu- 
nion and Sermon, followed by a grand Te Deum, 
The Celebrant was the Archbishop of Canterbury. 
The Bishop of Minnesota read the Epistle; the 
Bishop of London the Gospel. The Sermon was 
preached by the Archbishop of York, who took as his 
text Romans viii. 19, “The earnest expectation of 
the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons 
of God.” 3 

An enormous congregation crowded the space 
under the dome, as well as the nave, transepts, and 
both aisles. The service lasted more than three 
hours. After the Ze Deum, the long procession 
returned to the west door, and the third Lambeth 
Conference was at an end. 

Of the 145 Bishops who took part in it, 46 
belonged to England and Wales,‘ 11 to Ireland, 6 to 
Scotland, 29 to the United States of America, and 53 
to Colonial and Missionary Dioceses throughout the 

1 About 130 Bishops were present. 
2 Gounod. 

3 Part II., No. XXXVII., page 364. 
4 Viz., 32 Diocesan Bishops, 8 Bishops Suffragan, and 6 
ex-Colonial Bishops holding Commissions in England. 

Close of the third Conference. 47 

Warm thanks were tendered to all those on whom 
the business arrangements of the Conference had 
devolved ; and, not least, to the Committee of lay- 
men who had again, as in 1878, under Mr. Talbot’s 
guidance, made themselves responsible for the orga- 
nisation of the hospitality offered to American and 
Colonial Bishops. Mr. Tallents acted as Hon. 
Secretary of this important Committee. 

The Encyclical Letter and Reports were imme- 
diately published by the Society for Promoting 
Christian Knowledge, and obtained a wide and rapid 
circulation, more than 18,000 having been sold 
before the close of the year. 

The Encyclical Letter and the Resolutions of the 
Conference were translated into Greek and Latin by 
Bishop Wordsworth of Salisbury, who thus carried 
on the work undertaken on the two previous occasions 
by his father, the Bishop of Lincoln. These versions 
are reproduced below.! 

The foregoing narrative has dealt simply with the 
three Conferences in their bare official aspect. The 
indirect results which accrue from such gatherings 
are probably at least as great as those of an official 
kind. For an estimate of these indirect results, how- 
ever, and for the impression made by the debates of 
the earlier Conferences upon those who attended 
them, the reader must turn to the accounts which 
have been published in ample number in the 
Biographies of Bishops on both sides of the Atlantic.® 

The keen interest aroused on every side by the 
Conference of 1888 has given evidence enough, were 

1 See Part II., No. XXXVIIL., page 376. 

2 Z.g., Lives of Bishops Sumner, Gray, Hopkins, Ewing 
Selwyn, Kerfoot, Wilberforce, Wordsworth, &c. 

48 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

such required, that those who planned in faith and 
courage the first of these decennial gatherings were 
right in believing that ἃ solid gain must follow, not to 
the Anglican Communion only, but to the Church of 
Christ throughout the world. 

ΓΝ 11. 

Letters and Documents wllustrating 
the Lflistory of the Lambeth 


Letter from the Canadian» Church. 51 

No. I. (See page 10.) 

Addresses from the Provincial Synod of the United 
Church of England and Ireland in Canada, 
assembled at Montreal in September, 1865; with 
the Reply of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 

To the Most Reverend the Archbishop, the Right 
Reverend the Bishops, and the Reverend the 
Clergy of the Convocation of the Province of 

We, the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the Cana- 
dian Branch of the United Church of England and 
Ireland, in Synod assembled, would approach your 
Venerable Body with the deepest sentiments of 
reverence and affection. 

We are engaged, like yourselves, in endeavouring, 
in this distant dependency of the Crown, to uphold 
the truth of Religion, as our Common Church main- 
tains it, and that Apostolic Order which is so 
essential a safeguard in the preservation and diffusion 
of the Catholic Faith. Recent declarations in high 
places in our Mother-land, in reference to the position 
of the Colonial Branches of the Mother Church, have 
created amongst us feelings of regret and apprehen- 
sion, as tending to shake the conviction, always so 
dear to us, that we in the Colonies were, in all 
respects, one with the Church of our parent country. 

No statute or decision, we beg solemnly to assure 
you, much as it may serve to weaken our outward 
connection with the Church of our fathers, can impair 

52 - Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

the integrity and vigour of those principles in 
doctrine and fellowship which constitute her inward 
life. We are one with her in the great Articles of 
Christian Belief, and one with her in that Episcopal 
Order which binds her members in unity throughout 
the world. 

In desiring most earnestly to retain this connec- 
tion, we believe that it would be most effectually 
preserved and perpetuated if means could be adopted 
by which the members of our Anglican Communion 
in all quarters of the world should have a share in 
the deliberations for her welfare, and be permitted to 
have a representation in one General Council of her 
members gathered from every land. Deeply affected 
by the threat of isolation which recent declarations 
-in high places have indicated, we earnestly solicit 
this measure of relief, as maintaining that test 
of inward communion which is to us the most 

But while we look with hope to such concession, 
we readily affirm our belief that the manner and 
measure of the relief and encouragement we solicit 
will be left most wisely to the deliberate judgment of 
those ancient Convocations of the Church to whom, 
under God, the cause of true religion at home and 
abroad is so largely indebted. 

Dated at the City of Montreal, in the Province of 
Canada, this twentieth day of September, in the year 
of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty- 

Metropolitan, Prolocutor. 

Letter from the Canadian Church. 53. 

To His Grace Charles Thomas, Archbishop of Can- 
terbury, D.D., Primate of all England, and 

May it please your Grace,— 

We, the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the 
Province of Canada, in Triennial Synod assembled, 
desire to represent to your Grace, that in consequence 
of the recent decisions of the Judicial Committee of 
the Privy Council in the well-known case respecting 
the Essays and Reviews, and also in the case of the 
Bishop of Natal and the Bishop of Cape Town, the 
minds of many members of the Church have been 
unsettled or painfully alarmed; and that doctrines 
hitherto believed to be Scriptural, and undoubtedly 
held by the members of the Church of England and 
Ireland, have been adjudicated upon by the Privy 
Council in such a way as to lead thousands of our 
brethren to conclude that, according to this decision, 
it is quite compatible with membership in the Church 
of England to discredit the historical facts of Holy 
Scripture, and to disbelieve the eternity of future 
punishment; moreover, we would express to your 
Grace the intense alarm felt by many in Canada lest 
the tendency of the revival of the active powers of 
Convocation should leave us governed by canons 
different from those in force in England and Ireland 
and thus cause us to drift into the status of an inde 
pendent branch of the Catholic Church—a result 
which we would at this time most solemnly deplore. 

In order, therefore, to comfort the souls of the 
faithful, and reassure the minds of wavering members 
of the Church, and to obviate, as far as may be, the 
suspicion whereby so many are scandalised, that the 
Church is a creation of Parliament, we humbly entreat 
your Grace, since the assembling of a General Council 
of the whole Catholic Church is at present imprac- 
ticable, to convene a National Synod of the Bishops 

54 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

of the Anglican Church at home and abroad, who, 
attended by one or more of their presbyters or lay- 
men, learned in ecclesiastical law, as their advisers, 
may meet together, and, under the guidance of the 
Holy Ghost, take such counsel and adopt such 
measures as may be best fitted to provide for the 
present distress in such Synod, presided over by 
your Grace. 

Metropolitan, President. Prolocutor. 

Reply of the Archbishop. 

To the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the Province of 
Canada, lately assembled in their Triennial 

ADDINGTON PARK, December, 1865. 

My Right Rev., Rev., dear Brethren,— 

I have duly received the Address forwarded to 
me by your Metropolitan, from the late Triennial 
Provincial Synod of the Province of Canada, request- 
ing me to convene a Synod of the Bishops of the 
Anglican Church, both at home and abroad, in order 
that they may meet together, and, under the guidance 
of the Holy Ghost, take such counsel, and adopt such 
measures, as may be best fitted to provide for the 
present distress. 

I can well understand your surprise and alarm at 
the recent decisions of the Judicial Committee of the 
Privy Council in grave matters bearing upon the 
doctrine and discipline of our Church, and I can 
comprehend your anxiety, lest the recent revival of 
action in the two Provincial Convocations of Canter- 
bury and York should lead to the disturbance of 
those relations, which have hitherto subsisted between 
the different branches of the Anglican Church. 

Convocation Proceedings. 55 

The meeting of such a Synod as you propose is: 
not by any means foreign to my own feelings, and I 
think it might tend to prevent those inconveniences, 
the possibility of which you anticipate. I cannot, 
however, take any step in so grave a matter without 
consulting my episcopal brethren in both branches 
of the United Church of England and Ireland, as 
well as those in the different. colonies and depen- 
dencies of the British Empire. 

I remain, your faithful and affectionate friend and 
brother in Christ, 


Primate of All England. 

No. II. (See page to.) 

Proceedings of the Convocation of Canterbury with 
respect to the Canadian Address of September, 

On May 2, 1866, the Lower House unanimously 
resolved, “That his Grace the President be respect- 
fully requested to direct the appointment of a Com- 
mittee to consider and report upon the Address of 
the Canadian Branch of the United Church of 
England and Ireland, dated at Montreal, Sep- 
tember 20, 1865.”’—(Chronicle of Convocation, May 2, 
1866, 2. 290.) 

The President having granted this request, a Com- 
mittee of fifteen members was appointed. The 
Committee presented its report on June 29, 1866, 
but the debate upon it was postponed until the fol- 
lowing group of sessions. 

On February 14, 1867, the Lower House, after a 
prolonged discussion, agreed by a majority of 29 to 
the following resolution :— 

“That this House tenders its sincere thanks to the 
Committee on the Address of the Canadian Church, 

56 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

for the labour which they have bestowed on the 
subject, and for the Report which they have framed 
and presented to this House, and desires to convey 
to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury a 
respectful expression of an earnest desire that he 
would be pleased to issue an invitation to all the 
Bishops in communion with the Church of England 
to assemble at such time and place, and accompanied 
by such persons as may be deemed fit, for the pur- 
pose of Christian sympathy and mutual counsel on 
matters affecting the welfare of the Church at home 
and abroad ; and that this resolution be forwarded to 
the Upper House.” 

A debate upon the subject took place in the Upper 
House on the following day. No formal resolution 
was proposed, but the Archbishop announced his 
intention of acceding to the request which had been 
made.—( Chronicle of Convocation, February 14.and 15, 

1867, Dp. 767-793, 800-808.) 

No; : HI: (Seb cdee ἕω 

Official Arrangements for the Conference of Bishops of 
the Anglican Communion, to be holden at Lambeth 
Palace, on September 24, 1867, and following days. 

First Day.—Tuesday, September 24, at eleven 
o'clock, am. Prayers and Holy Communion. 
Sermon, by the Bishop of Illinois. 

General Subject for the Day's Discusston, 


Opening Address of the President: specifying 
the general principles and rules of the Conference, 

Programme for Conference of 1867. 57 

and inviting any introductory remarks from Home 
Metropolitans and from distant Bishops. 

General agreement as to the arrangement of the 
time and subjects. 

Resolution :— 

We, Bishops of Christ’s Holy Catholic Church, 
professing the faith of the primitive and undivided 
Church, as based on Scripture, defined by the first 
four General Councils,' and reaffirmed by the Fathers 
of the English Reformation, now assembled by the 
good providence of God at the Archiepiscopal Palace 
of Lambeth, under the presidency of the Primate of 
all England, desire, First, to give hearty thanks to 
Almighty God for having thus brought us together 
for common counsels, and united worship; Secondly, 
we desire to express the deep sorrow with which we 
view the divided condition of the flock of Christ 
throughout the world; and, Lastly, we do here 
solemnly declare our belief that the best hope of 
future reunion will be found in drawing each of us 
for ourselves closer to our common Lord, in giving 
ourselves to much prayer and intercession, in the 
cultivation of a spirit of charity, and in seeking to 
diffuse through every part of the Christian com- 
munity that desire and resolution to return to the 
faith and discipline of the undivided Church which 
was the principle of the English Reformation. 

Resolution :— 
Notification of New Sees and Bishops. 

That it appears to us expedient, for the purpose 
of maintaining brotherly intercommunion, that all 
cases of establishment of new Sees, and appoint- 
ment of new Bishops, be notified to all Archbishops 
and Metropolitans of the Home and Colonial Church 

1 See 1 Eliz., c. 1. xxxvi. 

58 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

‘of England and Ireland, the Primus of the Protestant 
Episcopal Church in Scotland, and the Presiding 
Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the 
United States of America. 

Resolution :— 
Letters Commendatory. 

- That, having regard to the conditions under which 
intercommunion between Members of the Church 
passing from one distant Diocese to another may be 
duly maintained, we hereby deem it desirable— 

(1) That forms of Letters Commendatory on 
behalf of clergymen visiting other Dioceses be drawn 
up and agreed upon, and that no strange clergyman 
should officiate in any Diocese without exhibiting 
such Commendatory Letters to the Bishop thereof ; 

(2) That a form of Letters Commendatory for 
such Laymen as may desire to avail themselves of 
them be in like manner prepared. 

The Benediction. 

SECOND DAy.—Wednesday, September 25. 
General Subject for the Day's Discussion, 

Resolution :— 
Subordination to Metropolitans. 

That it be a matter for the consideration of this 
Conference, and of the Bishops of the Colonial 

Church especially— 
(1) Whether it be desirable that such Colonial 

and Missionary Dioceses as have not as yet been 
gathered into Provinces be formed into any Province; 

(2) Whether any, and if so what, steps should be 


Programme for Conference of 1867. 59 

Resolution :— 

Discipline to be exercised by Metropolctans. 

That, whereas schemes for conducting Ecclesias- 
tical Affairs and for the exercising of Discipline 
have been embodied in the Letters Patent granted 
by the Crown to the Metropolitans of Canada, India, 
Australasia, New Zealand, and South Africa, it 
appears to us to be desirable that the aforesaid. 
schemes so embodied in the Letters Patent be, for 
the present, and until the local authorities, spiritual 
and temporal, have otherwise provided, as much as. 
possible adhered to; and that in all cases where the 
power of coercive jurisdiction is not conveyed by 
such Letters Patent it is desirable to provide by 
voluntary agreement for the enforcement of discipline, 
and that with a view to secure this end, all Bishops 
at their Consecration, and clergymen of those 
Dioceses at their ordination or institution to the cure 
of souls, should be required to pledge themselves to 
submit to the provisions of such schemes. 

Resolution :— 
Court of Metropolitans. 

That in the case of any charges being preferred 
against a Suffragan Bishop of any Province, it appears 
to us desirable that the Metropolitan thereof should 
summon all the Bishops of his Province to sit with 
him for the hearing of the case, and that he should 
not proceed to the hearing of it without the aid and 
concurrence of all the Bishops of his Province that 
can be assembled. 

The question of any charge being brought against 
a Metropolitan should also be considered. 

Resolution :— 
Question of Appeal. 
That it be a matter for the consideration of this 

Conference whether, in cases where no Letters 

60 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

Patent have been issued, any, and if any what, 
Appeal should lie from such Provincial Decisions. 

Resolution :— | 
Conditions of Union. 

That it be a matter for the consideration of this 
‘Conference, in reference to Colonial Churches not 
legally united to the United Churches of England 
and Ireland, what safeguards as to their continued 
soundness in Doctrine and Discipline be required by 
the Mother Church as the condition of the main- 
tenance of full spiritual and ecclesiastical communion. 

The Benediction. 

THIRD DAy.—Thursday, September 26th. 
General Subject for the Day's Discusszon, 

Resolution :— 

Notification of proposed Missionary Bishoprics. 

That in case it should be proposed to found a 
Missionary Bishopric by any of the branches of the | 
Church represented in this Conference, it seems to 
us desirable— | 

(1) That notification of such intention be sent to 
all Archbishops and Metropolitans of the Home and 
Colonial Church of England and Ireland, the Primus 
of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Scotland, and 
the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal 
Church in the United States ; and 

(2) That, so soon as any person is consecrated to 
such Bishopric, the announcement of such Conse- 
cration be made to the same parties. 

Sermon of the Bishop of 1 ροῖς. 61 

Resolution :— 
Subordination of Missionaries. 

That, in the case of the establishment of any 
Missionary Bishopric, and consecration of a Bishop 
to the same, we deem it expedient that all Mission- 
aries should place themselves under the general 
superintendence of such Missionary Bishop, subject 
always to their obedience to such written instructions 
as may be sent to them by those in authority at 

Concluding resolution :— 

That we desire to render our hearty thanks to 
Almighty God for the blessings vouchsafed to us in 
and by this Conference; and we desire to express 
our hope that this our Meeting may hereafter be 
followed by other Meetings to be conducted in the 
spirit of the same brotherly love. 

The Closing Benediction. 

No. IV. 

Sermon of Bishop Whitehouse, of Illinois, preached in 
Lambeth Palace Chapel, on September 24, 1867. 

“Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that 
which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his 
body’s sake, which is the Church.”—Co/. i. 24. 

There is something very startling at the first glance 
in the leading phraseology of this verse, and we chal- 
lenge it with almost a suspicion that it cannot consist 
with the humility of the man who chides himself as 
“less than the least of all saints.” 

62 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

“Fill up” what is behind of the sufferings of 
Christ! “Fill up” the sufferings of the “Man of 
sorrows!” “Fill up” the pains of poverty, exposure, 
anxiety, betrayal, and agony which,—speaking in the 
light of this world,—scarce left a sunny spot in the 
life of Jesus! “Fill up” the sufferings of One who 
drank drop by drop the mysterious cup of the Divine 
wrath, while mind and body agonized in the terrible 
struggle! “Fill up” the precious sufferings which 
bought and healed a world ! 

This cannot be, and by every trait of the Apostle’s 
character, as well as by the perfection and triumph of 
the Cross, we are warned off from any such construc- 
tion. Yet the words stand written for our learning. 
There is a sense in which the spirit sealed them as 
eternal truth, and like the other parts of the same 
Testament they are living words for our hearts, con- 
sciences, and lives. 

What Paul did, and realized in his experience, 
belongs, we may be assured, to the true spirit and 
compass of our profession. The affection which 
bound him thus to the Church and Christ must find 
a responsive place in our hearts, as successors in his 
calling of trust and sacrifice, which, though exercised 
in the midst of less “ fiery trials” may still require us 
to be “armed with the same suffering mind.” It 
at least may show, in the deep-toned and mystical 
relations it involves, what is the hereditary commission 
of the Elect, and the burden on their generations of 
discharging a long entail of “afflictions” for His 
body’s sake, which is the Church. 3 

I am placed to-day in one of the most trying, as 
well as the most honourable, positions of, my life. 
The delicate courtesy of His Grace of Canterbury 
transferred the trust of the opening sermon to the 
American Episcopate, and the friendship of our own 
Presiding Bishop devolved it on me, because to some 
extent I had been identified with this plan of demon- 
strative unity, and had been adopted into the earlier 

Sermon of the Bishop of Lllinots. 63 

councils which determined and shaped it,—selected 
thus by a courtesy, which did not stop to weigh 
merit or estimate capacity, but regarded only the 
antecedent of a remoter accident and privilege. 

I know, brothers beloved, that I am standing in 
the circle of my peers in the rank of ministration of 
Christ’s Church, and that officially we are equal. 
But I cannot keep down the consciousness to how 
limited an extent that peerage applies to an equality 
of learning, manhood, grace, experience, and power 
in the “rhetoric of life,’ the lovely and profound 
graces of your “holy conversation.” I cannot clear 
myself from an inward rebuke that I should be 
speaking as the father of Fathers, when I ought to sit 
in silence, learning as “a child.’ Each impulse has 
been checked, each thought has been crippled by the 
haunting majesty of this strange secluded assembly, 
and the vision of my own “ presence” so weak among 

But, while I have prayed and striven to “glory in 
my infirmities” that the power of Christ may rest 
upon me, I still cast myself upon a consciousness 
that you have all learned through a life’s tears, no 
matter how gifted you are, an experience taught by all 
the huge discrepancy between the proud aggression 
of the “young Melancthon,” daring for success, and 
the subdued Apostle with the care of all the Churches. 
What a sympathy we instinctively acquire with 
words which breath of pity for sinfulness, and help 
for labour, of a closer union with the unseen, of steps 
guided on a great appointed course, of fellowship in 
sufferings, begun in the holy flesh and holy soul of 
our own Lord, and of the spirit of Grace, which is 
continually teaching in discipline and soothing with 
comfort, offering us sweet thorns that may be woven 
into an angel’s crown, and transmuting each sancti- 
fied care and struggle into a coronal, rayed with the 
glory of Christ. 

Hence then may I preach as communing with my 

64 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

own tried and feeble nature, to chasten and cheer it ; 
believing that we are more nearly one on the “hidden 
man of the heart,” then we may be divided on your 
eminence of scholarship or well-earned human 
dignity. I trust more to touch the finer association 
of your experience, than afford any instruction ; but 
in our brotherhood with the great apostle, as “ keepers 
of the flocks” we may meditatively appreciate his 
divine words, and sympathize with his invigorating 

Because Paul was made an apostle and minister, 
“the afflictions” follow of necessity; they are 
inherent of the office, as much as are the aggressive 
duties and systematic labours. The enduring them 
is fruit tothe Church which is Christ’s Body ; and 
we cannot properly estimate a labour or affliction 
without regarding both as the ὑστερήματα which, like 
the “fragments” supernatural in the wilderness. 
banquet of the five barley loaves and small fishes, 
are gathered up by apostolic hands, each in his own. 
basket, until the whole be fulfilled in the completed 
elect. The apostle calls himself διάκονος, of the 
Church, and for the Church, but where that Church 
is ὀικονόμια θέου, a family to be administered, and a 
trust involved of stewardship and implication, which, 
even if unjustly handled, still involves relations of 
personal profit. 

But the ὑστερήματα mentioned are not the “ filling 
up” of παθήματα, the passion and sufferings, for the 
expiation of sin, of the Incarnate and Crucified, which 
none could fill up and none can have, except in the 
transferred experience of a crucified, buried, and risen 
soul. Neither are they “sufferings” which malice 
and violence even to martyrdom may wreak on the 
flesh, and hurl on the quivering nerves.. But, they 
are θλίψεις, afflictions of the inner nature and the 
heart’s consciousness, which are not to be met in the 
bravery of a stern endurance, which casts them off as 
a very little thing, in the anasthesia of the flesh from 

Sermon of the Bishop of Lllinots. 65. 

the inward hope of glory. They are “afflictions” 
which it were treachery not to feel, and loss not to 
cherish ; where the inner man must be seared to the 
right spiritual sensibility, if it does not respond to 
them, not only in the pang of the sword, which goeth 
through the heart, but in a quickened heart to casket 
them in the tenderness, which saddens but elevates 
the whole nature. 

Christ and His ministry constitute one mystical 
personality, and the identity runs through every 
relation—as He is, so are they in this world. The 
servant is not greater than his Lord, and separation 
even to cruelty and hate, may be a natural sequence, 
as we carry about in our body the mortification of 
Christ, that His life may be manifested in us. But 
far deeper is this, a community of liegemen and 
servants sharing loyally in the struggle and attainder 
of the Lord, for Christ says, I call you not servants 
but friends, for the servant knoweth not what his 
Lord doeth. It is the fellowship of the inner and 
spiritual ; the co-operative in counsel and purpose, 
the ancestral of an ever-returning feast with hereditary 
dignity, and the noble responsibility of a heritage 
faithfully transmitted in integrity and honour. It is 

the consciousness inspiring every power, that while 
' the leadership is resistless and the result triumph, 
each individual effort exerted, and specially every 
“affliction” garnered in the watchful breast in sym- 
pathy with the Head, is graciously allowed as 
contribution of individual partnership, accelerating 
the issue and filling up the measure of the hours of 

The sufferings of Christ are thus to be doubly taken 
—those which He sustained in His own body, where 
nothing remains to be fulfilled ; the other to be suffered 
in His mystical Body to the end of the ages ;—and 
so there remain many sufferings to be fulfilled. Of 
this the Church as the appointed agency, the ministry 
as the delegated headship, the members as the instru- 

66 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

ments of work, must, severally and incorporate, carry 
the burthen, as the Church represents Christ fulfilling, 
both in receptiveness and activity, the work which the 
Father gave Him todo. But the spirit in which the 
“afflictions” are borne and the work done, is rejoicing, 
the “joy in tribulation,” the winnowing of the elect. 
Hence the filling up of what is behind of the afflic- 
tions of Christ in “my flesh” has the two-fold 
relation of sufferings of ours assumed by Christ, and 
afflictions of His bequeathed to us in the grace of 
reciprocal endurance. 

The visible Church, “ the body of Christ,” instinct 
with life, guidance, and sympathy from its visible 
Head, is now witnessing in sackcloth. At every 
point in the million million pores of sensibility, and 
the deep capacity of a worn and anguished soul, the 
“body” is fulfilling through its organism, the heir- 
loom of the suffering state imparted by Him,—who 
touched earth “to begin to do and to teach,” who 
lived the “ Man of sorrows,” baptized His body into 
His own baptism of blood, and left that Body to 
work out, in its ages of discipline and mercy, the 
mission begun over the hills and valleys of Palestine. 

The three years of the Lord’s earthly manifestation 
were type and pattern of all to follow. Had that 
ministry continued for centuries ;.had those precious 
feet trodden worn and bleeding all earth’s highways 
and acres ; had that voice rung in its awful immen- 
sity from heaven to hell, or pleaded with sweet 
gentleness in the household ear, still would the 
mysterious history have been the same,—afflictions, 
rejection, crucifying afresh, and the few cross-bearers 
following with holy chaunt the same pathway, and 
gathering up the “fragments” of their Master’s 
afflictions as a manna creation for earthly wants, 
support for duty, memorial of tenderness, and earnest 
of power, triumphant through weakness. 

Such is and will be the position of the Church 
which is Christ’s body in this world, which world in 

Sermon of the Bishop of Illinors. 67 

all its plans and policy, its heart and intellect, is 
opposed to Christ ; such in some familiar or strange 
forms will be the experience of the visible headship 
of the undying Episcopate; such will be, in the 
experience of the believer’s soul, the stigmata that 
testify his fellowship in suffering, and the pulsations 
of the infused current of the resurrection life. 

The sufferings of the Redeemer, personal and 
propitiatory, terminated on the cross. Heaven and 
earth, time and eternity, took the indelible record, 
“Tt ts finished.” But as He is one with the holy 
cause of His truth and Church, given back in the 
hour of universal dominion as Head over all things, 
to be the living Head of His living Body, the 
Church, the measure of suffering is wot fulfilled, the 
lien of afflictions zo¢ discharged until the reproach, 
persecution, and distress of the militant Church, and 
the far sorer trials of her inner struggles have ended, 
and her honoured faithful are the crowned conquerors 
of the spotless church above. In the whole militant 
Church, distributed through its offices and member- 
ship, through its work and feeling ; under the blow 
from without or the rending pang within ; in the 
stern hour of fierceness, impotent to crush, or in the 
ceaseless burthen of infirmity and sins ; in the com- 
mon griefs, or the thorn betrayed only in the lone 
cry of a thrice pressed anguish ; for you, for me, for 
Christ’s ministers and Christ’s “little ones” are the 
sufferings of Christ, one day to be “filled up,” 
completed gloriously sealed. 

St. Paul represents himself as affording his flesh, 
—in its old nature, spiritually crucified, and, in its 
power of labour and endurance, activity, and influence 
freely consecrated,—to press on this consummation, 
and hasten the coming hour of victory and peace. 
Paul shrank neither from a suffering Messiah nor a 
suffering Church, but, appreciating in both the highest 
attributes of excellence and honour, cast body and 
soul into the mould, to be used by Christ, as well as 

68 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

to be “formed after the image of Him who created 
him.” He rejoiced in his calling, magnified his. 
office, glorified his Saviour for His work and His 
love, discerned and cherished His mystical Body, 
vindicated his apostleship with the might of his. 
intellect and the heroism of his gigantic mission,. 
irradiated Judaism and subdued the heathen, preached 
far and wide the exhaustless Gospel, and then in 
hallowed egoism threw open his own breast, that with 
the blood of the sufferings—love warm and joy dyed,— 
he might still feed his precious nestlings and nourish 
children’s children. “I now rejoice in my sufferings. 
for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflic- 
tions of Christ in my flesh for His body’s sake, 
which is the Church.” 

And we, successors of his ministry and heirs of his. 
faith, glorying in our calling and moaning apart,. 
“Not worthy—not worthy to be called an apostle!” 
we, when century has heaped on century the wrecks 
of all human institutions, and buried them beneath 
the dying verdure of fresh spring-times, only to be 
crushed with more crumbling ruins, we who live when. 
material progress scorns the past, when Mammon 
builds Babel towers ; and science utters oracles from: 
rocks and graves, to confuse the old faiths, and dis- 
honour old trusts;—we stand in our unbroken line, 
witness by the same sacramental altars of eighteen 
centuries agone, confess in the same creeds, teach 
from the same inspired word, recognize the mystical 
spouse ever young and beautiful, and are folded to 
her breast as a dear and holy mother ; we find per- 
petuated in Christ’s visible body, each function of its 
living organism, each susceptibility of its complex 
being and individual experience, and encounter 
“the dangers and chances of the world” inthe same 
conflict with the same suffering Church. As we 
catch this single gush of heart-revealing it is fresh for 
us as a living spring to thirsty lip. We drink it in, 
and then down among all our heart sickness and. 

Sermon of the Bishop of Lllinors. 69 

bewildered struggles, our wearying shame and spec- 
cral responsibility, where perhaps years have withered 
the flowers, and dried even perennial roots, there are 
we conscious of response to joy in sufferings. 

We rejoice in sympathy, because for us also, this 
single verse is the experience of the believing soul, 
because it explains our place in this world, because 
it opens our sufficient consolation and because it 
defines our honourable trust. 

How much of our understanding and enjoyment 
of Gospel righteousness depends on the proper view 
of our real oneness with Christ. When we know 
Him, not alone “after the flesh” asa being of singu- 
lar and isolated excellence, of noble character, sweet 
benevolence and lofty power, as the great Teacher to 
a band of disciples, the bright example of purity and 
love, standing off from us to be studied, imitated, 
honoured, and adored—but, when we know Him in 
the spirit as united to us, our wisdom, our righteous- 
ness, our sanctification, our redemption, acting for us 
and acting in us, and our spiritual nature entering into 
the same condition as that of our great representative, 
as it is written “If any man be in Christ he is a new 
creature,’—then indeed, the travail and the victory 
of Christ are his. He is the son of God and heir of 
the kingdom; he has become the beloved child in 
whom the Father is well pleased. He has eternal 
life abiding in him; he has come unto Mount Sion 
and the new Jerusalem, and the brotherhood of the 
living dead ; his enemies are overcome, and he is the 
conqueror of death and hell; his portion is to be 
where Christ is, and his progress, even now is “ from 
glory to glory ;” already he is exercising his priest- 
hood and his kingship, he reigns with Christ. 

It doth not indeed yet “appear” what we shall be. 
Much of this germing glory is and will be hidden. 
The new creatures carry to outward observation the 
soiled and beggar dress of the hedge and the wilder- 
ness. To man they look even as others who have no 

70 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

such hope, and even to themselves they seem only 
weak, unfaithful and chief of sinners. It doth not 
appear to us, but it does appear to the Father, the 
Lamb and the Spirit. They regard the true Christian 
as thus transformed into Christ’s image, clothed with 
Christ’s righteousness, united to Him in the reciprocal 
crucifixion and the new life of the resurrection, dead 
in Christ, in Him quickened, justified, and raised, the 
new and heavenly being called into life within ; with 
a struggling but conquering holiness pressing him 
towards the mark for the prize of the high calling. 
In proportion as he sees and feels this precious. 
mystical and spiritual union, will the believer learn 
to rejoice with “ joy unspeakable and full of glory.” 
It explains our place in the world in its perpetual 
separation and inevitable antagonism. Oh! awful 
vastness and penetrative subtilty of the world! We 
are not marshalled sharp and defiant as hostile 
armies, flaunting their standards, serried in rank and 
battle cry. But the world is all around us, the 
enveloping medium, and with elemental forces,—the 
world around the Church, the world w#thin the 
Church, and the world in each heart of struggle and 
grace. But no matter where, no matter in what 
form ; no matter how bold in cruelty, how seductive 
in blandishment, how tangled in interest, and blended 
in counsels, how co-operative in social advances, and 
mutually dependent in the instruments, still the 
enmity of the world is deep and permanent, according 
to that significant saying of the Saviour,—the world 
hated Me before it hated you. Hence our age and 
condition will be necessarily a period of multiplied 
and distributed “afflictions,” minutely ramified and 
keenly penetrative, boundless in area as exhaustless 
in ingenuity. The Church is alive and the world is 
alive. Each grapples the other or permeates the 
other as the case may be, on contact at myriad 
points, with forces and influences, silent as the dew, 
and leaping as the cloud-flash; internal as_ the 

Sermon of the Bishop of [llinots. 71 

blood current and sensitive as the nerves; wise as the 
serpent and grand in intellect and research ; tender as 
the dove and fascinating as household loves. This 
is our heritage for “ afflictions,” this is our treasure- 
house for rejoicing in sufferings. 

The mummy may lie in the sarcophagus, and the 
sick cripple lie still on the couch, but the active, the 
vigorous, the busy want space and motion, conflict 
and antagonism. They will race hither and thither 
to be filled. This is our “hour” and in such an age 
“ numbers numberless ” will be the afflictions of Christ. 

Not ours the time, when the light through the 
casement or the “songin the night” of solitary faith 
betrayed the watcher of the Church in the wilderness 
of heathenism or corruption ; nor ours the fellowship 
in suffering, doing and bearing for the truth, as we 
would in the dungeon, at the stake, in the amphi- 
theatre or in the disciplinary solitude of the cave on 
the mountain. Ours is the superb energy of revival, 
when the Church God inspired, challenges, wrestles, 
and works; when the Church claims her inheritance, 
and vows to retrieve it ; when she moves aggressively 
as a recognised power, rallies her men, women and 
children for work through society, on the summits of 
refinement, in the places of learning, in the throng of 
cities down to their gloomiest dens, over the fields and 
hamlets, in mines and factories, following enterprise 
to the distant colony and reclaiming the waste; when 
she cheers with prayers the wayfarer of the cross 
into heathenism refined or brutal, and enlarges the 
heart so long exiled from the brotherhood of 
Christendom with plans and pleadings for restoring 
unity. This is an age of vigour, materialism, science, 
and breadth ; this is an age of thrift, refinement, and 
liberty, which quickens the individual to intense 
development and drives the mass with impassioned 
tread ;—can we wonder that we of the Anglican 
Communion have the yearnings, the griefs, the temp- 
tations, the betrayals, the false purposes and mis- 

72 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

guided minds, the inadequate resources, all the 
indescribable conflicts which darken our atmosphere ? 
Can we deny how much we deserve the rebuke, 
ridicule, and correction of the sharp world around us? 
Can we hush our sobs when we know in our poor 
experience how Christ is wounded in the house of 
His friends? Can we cheer ourselves in selfish 
gladness, when there is so much to be done, so much 
to be endured, and the strife seems so unequal with 
our shepherd sling? No, brothers, no; we bless God 
in our heart of hearts that He has poured around 
light and heat, even if it does quicken spawn of evil, 
if it does shame us in its brightness, and make us 
faint in its glow; you wish no change in the strife 
that tends not to victory, no higher honour than to 
gather the fragments of the sufferings of Jesus, no 
more sufficient consolation than the pledge which 
covers all infirmities and reaches our heart sins. 
“My grace is sufficient for thee.” This is for us 
“Qur song in the night,” the force of the day’s work, 
a consciousness within not to be uttered ;—“I xow 
rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that 
which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh 
for his body’s sake which is the Church.” 

And these words open our sufficient consolation. 
As Downe quaintly says, “The joy of that text is 
germinal and ariseth out of the bosom and womb of 
the sorrow itself. It is not that I rejoice because I 
am afflicted ; it is not because I shall sink in my 
calamity and be buried in that valley, but because 
my calamity raises me, and makes my valley a hill 
bringing me nearer to God.” Even so! St. Paul said, 
“T now rejoice in my sufferings for you.’ Not that 
suffering ceased to be such, and physically his nerve 
did not quiver with pain or his heart sink in much 
weariness. ‘The “perils often” were noted and felt. 
The “care of all the Churches” pressed sore on an 
aching brow, and the “thorn in the flesh ” pierced 
with its hidden point the heart of hearts. Yet wel- 

Sermon of the Bishop of Illinois. 73 

come all! The union with Christ in all these things 
changed them into seeds of light, earnests of peace, 
and the noble martyr-soul could glow and nerve 
itself with the honourable mission and anticipated 

Such is our earthly trial when sanctified, such our 
labour and discipline and afflictions as ministers of 
Christ. Received in faith, sustained in hope, handled 
with disciplinary and bracing power, they make us 
better and meet for rest. We are assured that our 
Saviour sees thern, that we and ours are known and 
regarded, that succour and recompense are alike 
included, and so may we bear and do, “to fill up 
these afflictions of Christ in our flesh,” for Christ’s 
afflictions end in glory. 

Thus is defined our honourable trust, and this 
union to Christ, the membership with His body, the 
Church, and our peculiar calling of apostleship 
culminate in our obligations to others. St. Paul’s 
_whole estimate of human nature was changed by 
these relations to the covenant salvation. Hence- 
forth we hear him say, “I know no man after the 
flesh.” Once he had loved or rejected qualities 
inherent in the individual,and,on principles of his own 
taste or wisdom, he had admired the properties most 
honourable and useful to society, and within the 
restricted sphere of national prejudice and associa- 
tion. But this was changed. ΑἹ] men and each indi- 
vidual were now estimated as they were related to 
Christ. In the good he saw the Saviour’s righteous- 
ness and honour ; in the ignorant and impenitent, he 
saw only that they were “afar off,’ and alienated 
from Christ by wicked works. The whole moral 
creation was to him not as written in the flesh but 
in the spirit. Hence the joy was 22: suffering, not in 
the midst of it. It was for others, not for himself. 
It was in his flesh, not in spirit and disposition, but 
actually endured in the flesh. It was not for his own 
salvation but for edifying the Church, and ‘shat 


74 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

Christ’s visible body. He might have escaped it, if 
he would have been satisfied to have had his faith, in 
this sense to himself, before God, but he could not; 
he read himself, “ debtor to the Greek and barbarian, 
the bond and free,” and, specially, his “ kinsmen after 
the flesh,’ and through much tribulation he must 
press to fulfil it. Hence the diffusive love of the 
commissioned heart. All qualities are worthless, if 
debased by unrepented sin, all distinctions nothing, 
if they stand on the dead level of impenitence or un- 
belief. All sorrows are small in comparison with 
eternal danger, and the present degradation of “ the 
wrath of God abiding.” All relief is but superficial, 
which knows only the flesh, and weeps only from 
eyes which have been dimmed with no genuine tears 
_ of a faithful repentance. To know ourselves we must 
know Christ. To appreciate human nature in its 
realities for good and its fearful exposures to evil, 
we must enter into the same mind that was in Christ 
Jesus. To minister to what is useful, kind and loving, 
in our place of activity we must know men, not after 
the flesh, but in the worth and woe so awfully re- 
vealed and contrasted in the “sufferings of Christ.” 
A living union to Him, to which we are invited, drawn 
and changed by a tenderness which passeth concep- 
tion, is the fountain head of just relations to the 
world in its struggle and to our fellow-men in their 
claims. No one goes out over their length and 
breadth with such success and power, as the one who 
has attained experience of that happy, thrice happy 
state of soul, to love and forget himself in the Saviour, 
to live and act as Christ is, all and in all, and him- 
self a member of the great body, through which the 
life is sent and perpetuated, by the ever-present Re- 
deemer, in the oneness of work, suffering, and joy. 
And‘no bishop will grapple resolutely with a course 
of godly work, or adventure honestly in sacrifice of 
charity, or plead a heart message, or gently admonish 
in discipline, or even move on an earnest track of 

Sermon of the Bishop of Lllinors. 75 

functional duty, without finding,in and under all, 
sufferings, which, rightly interpreted, are the “ afflic- 
tions of Christ,’ and “implement” of the appointed 
measure of His suffering body. 

In relations which I have thus so feebly sketched, 
does the apostolic brotherhood of to-day gather under 
the roof which, for six centuries, has been the abode 
in wealth and power of the highest ecclesiastical 
dignity ;. where the mitred brows have ached with 
burthens grave enough to find large place in history, 
and hearts have wrestled in grief and pang written 
only in the Book of God. We meet in the solemn 
chapel, whence from Boniface onwards the same old 
line has defiled to the other high places of the church ; 
and from which have deployed over the broad Atlantic 
the four score who have verified in a new world the 
experience of the apostle, and the colonial band which 
is girdling the earth. Could the solemn possession 
of that Episcopate, from the place of the departed, 
utter their testimony, sure I am, it would be in accord 
with the Prisoner in Rome, and whenever work was 
true and spirit loyal, deep would answer to deep— 
“ Filling up the afflictions of Christ ”»—“ Rejoicing in 

And meet it was that the first appeal for a conclave 
of the likeminded Brotherhood should spring from a 
sense of anxiety, hazard, and bewildered responsi- 
bility. _Canada asked in weakness—God answered 
in strength. From the undefined and _ scattered 
afflictions, He summoned the joy of a grand demon- 
strative Unity. He collected the ὑστερήματα, “ frag- 
ments,’—so that the might and majesty of the super- 
natural creation might be disclosed,and the abundance 
be carried back on the homeward way for fresh hun- 
ger, and expanded multitudes. We have come from 
afar to this Conference in humility and weakness, 
bearing our personal and corporate griefs, and anxious 
to find in spiritual fellowship what by God’s grace 
may inform and strengthen us. But we have also 

F 2 

76 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

come to demonstrate for ever a fact, existent indeed, 
but one never before exhibited or made foederal in 
energy—the Co-operative Unity of the Anglican 

And, if we are permitted to secure the effect of the 
first of these to the extent only, that, as we each have 
need, our inner nature may go home refreshed in 
holiness and peace, and our working power be in- 
creased in confidence and extent, by the larger obser- 
vation and more assured fraternity ;—and if we 
should fulfil the other to the issue, that in equal and 
loving reality we had sealed together the Holy Sacra- 
ment the visible unity of the Anglo-Catholic Church, 
then—however in our consciousness we might be 
disappointed of larger results, or the world might 
cry, “what meaneth this waste,” or the Church might 
chide that we had not borne home more fruits for 
token,—still thoughtfully and in reverence, patiently 
waiting God’s time for His uses, manifold of this 
energized and visible potency, might we magnify 
Him for His goodness, that had made us partakers " 
in mission thus honoured and blest. 

But whether such an assembly speak trumpet- 
tongued from the high atmosphere of foederated 
liberty, or in tones chastened and restricted by con- 
sciousness of personal and national prescription, there 
will be experience of sorrow, rebuke without and 
misgiving within. In whatever we may do or say, 
or withhold in humble fervency of love and zeal, with 
soul intent on the welfare and woe of Christ’s Mystical 
Body, in recognized oneness with Him, in the “ fear 
and trembling” of a rejoicing heart, must there bea 
mingling of suffering “the filling up of the afflictions 
of Christ.” But “such grief is the mother of joy,” 
and Bernard says, “as the cells of the honeycomb 
wall in the honey, and the shell preserveth the kernel, 
so that joy collected and multiplied by the grace of 
our Lord, is prepared and preserved for the joys of 

Archbishops Opening Address, 1867. 77 

No. V. (See page 14.) 

Opening Address delivered by the Archbishop of Can- 
terbury in the first Session of the first Lambeth 
Conference, September 24, 1867. 


In opening the proceedings of the first Conference 
that has ever taken place of the Bishops of the 
Reformed Church in visible communion with the 
United Church of England and Ireland, my prevail- 
ing feeling is one of profound gratitude to our 
Heavenly Father for having thus far prospered the 
efforts which have been made to promote this solemn 
assembling of ourselves together. Many have been 
the anxious thoughts and great the heart-searchings 
which have attended the preparations for this remark- 
able manifestation of life and energy in the several 
branches of our communion. Many also have been 
the prayers, and fervent, I trust, will continue to be 
the prayers, offered up by us, severally and collec- 
tively, that He will prosper our deliberations, to the 
advancement of His glory and the good of His 
Church. Having met together, as I truly believe 
we have done, in a spirit of love to Christ, and to 
all those who love Him, with an earnest desire to 
strengthen the bonds which unite the several 
branches of our Reformed Church, to encourage 
each other in our endeavours to maintain the faith 
once delivered to the saints, and to advance the 

78 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

kingdom of Christ upon earth, I will not doubt that 
a blessing from above will rest upon our labours, and 
that the guidance of the Holy Spirit, whose aid we 
have invoked, will direct, sanctify, and govern our 

The origin of this Conference has already been 
stated in the circular of invitation which I addressed 
to you all. It was at the instance of the Metropoli- 
tan and the Bishops of the Church of Canada, sup- 
ported by the unanimous request of a very large 
meeting of Archbishops and Bishops of the Home 
and Colonial Church—a request confirmed by ad- 
dresses from both the Houses of Convocation of my 
Province of Canterbury—that I resolved upon con- 
vening it. Further encouragement to venture upon 
this unprecedented step was afforded when the peti- 
tion from the Canadian Church was first discussed, a 
plain intimation being given by a distinguished 
member of the Protestant Episcopal Church in: the 
United States of America, that it would be regarded 
as a very graceful act, and would be hailed with 
general satisfaction in that Church, if the invitation 
to the Conference were extended to our Episcopalian 
brethren in those States. 

Fully conscious, however, of all the difficulties 
which must surround the attempt to organise and 
superintend an assembly of so novel a character, I 
might well have hesitated to incur so great a risk ; 
but to have refused to yield to wishes thus fully and 
forcibly expressed, to have shrunk from undertaking 
the consequent responsibility; would have been un- 
worthy of the position in which, by God’s providence, 
I am placed. In faith and prayer has the task been 
undertaken, and I humbly trust it will please God to 
prosper our work to a successful conclusion. The 
result, indeed, has thus far more than justified the 
expectations raised. We rejoice to find that so 
many of our brethren from distant parts of the 
globe have been moved to respond to the call, and 

Archbishop's Opening Address, 1867. 79 

we welcome with feelings of cordial affection and 
genuine sympathy the presence of so large a pro- 
portion of the American Episcopate. From very 
many also, who, owing to various circumstances, 
have been prevented from joining us, I have received 
letters. expressing the profound satisfaction and 
thankfulness with which they regard the opportuni- 
ties afforded by this gathering for conferring to- 
gether upon topics of mutual interest ; for discussing 
the peculiar difficulties and perplexities in which our 
widely-scattered Colonial Churches are involved, and 
the evils to which they are exposed ; for cementing 
yet more firmly the bonds of Christian communion 
between Churches acknowledging one Lord, one 
faith, one baptism—connected not only by the ties 
of kindred, but by common formularies; ‘and for 
meeting, through their representatives, from the 
most distant regions of the earth, to offer up united 
prayers and praise to the Most High in the mother 
tongue common to us all, and to partake together 
of the Holy Communion of the Body and Blood of 
our Saviour Christ. 

It has never been contemplated that we should 
assume. the functions of a General Synod of all the 
Churches in full communion with the Church of 
England, and take upon ourselves to enact canons 
that should be binding upon those here represented. 
We merely propose to discuss matters of practical 
interest, and pronounce what we deem expedient 
in resolutions which may serve as safe guides to 
future action. Thus it will be seen that our first 
essay is rather tentative and experimental, in a 
matter in which we have no distinct precedent to 
direct us. 

The subjects which will be brought under your 
consideration have already been laid before you in 
the Prospectus of Arrangements for our proceedings. 
They may be briefly comprised under the following 
heads :—(1) The best way of promoting the Re- 

80 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

union of Christendom. (2) The Notification of the 
Establishment of New Sees. (3) Letters commen- 
datory from Clergymen and Laymen passing to 
distant Dioceses. (4) Subordination in our Colonial 
Church to Metropolitans. (5) Discipline to be exer- 
cised by Metropolitans. (6) Court of the Metro- 
politan. (7) Question of Appeal. (8) Conditions of 
Union with the Church at home. (9) Notification 
of proposed Missionary Bishoprics. (10) Subordina- 
tion of Missionaries. In the selection of topics 
regard has been chiefly had to those which bear on 
practical difficulties seeming to require solution. It 
has been found impossible to meet all views, and 
embrace every recommendation that has been sug- 
gested. Some may be of opinion that subjects have 
been omitted which ought to have found a place 
in our deliberations; that we should have been 
assembled with the view of defining the limits of 
Theological Truth; but it has been deemed far 
better, on the first occasion of our meeting in such 
form, rather to do too little than attempt too much, 
and instead of dealing with propositions which can 
lead to no efficient result, to confine ourselves to 
matters admitting of a practical and beneficial 

The unexpected position in which our Colonial 
Churches have recently found themselves placed has 
naturally created a great feeling of uneasiness in the 
minds of many. I am _ fully persuaded that the 
idea of any essential separation from the Mother 
Church is universally repudiated by them; they all 
cling to her with the strongest filial affection, while 
they are bound to her Doctrines and Form of 
Worship by cogent motives of interest. At the 
same time I have good reason to believe that there 
are various shades of opinion as to the best modes 
in which the connection between the daughter 
Churches and their common mother can be main- 
tained ; and I trust that the interchange of thought 

Archbishop's Opening Address, 1867. Sr. 

between those who are chiefly interested in those 
important questions will lead to some profitable 
conclusions. I may also state my belief that legis- 
lation on the subject of the Colonial Churches has 
been postponed until the view taken by this Con- 
ference shall have been declared. These matters 
have been regarded under various aspects in the 
voluminous correspondence which I have had with 
many of my Colonial brethren; they will all, no 
doubt, be fully developed in the course of our dis- 
cussion by those who represent these several 
opinions. I trust that, under a deep sense of the 
solemnity of the occasion on which we are 
assembled, our discussions will be characterised by 
mutual forbearance, if sentiments at variance with 
our own shall be advanced, so that by the com- 
parison, rather than the conflict of opinions, we may 
be drawn nearer to each other in brotherly harmony 
and concord. With the arrangement that certain 
subjects shall, after a brief consideration, be referred 
to Committees, I believe that the various topics for 
consideration may be profitably discussed. 

Doubtless there is much in these latter days, even 
as we have all been taught to expect, which is dark 
and dispiriting to the mind that has not been exer- 
cised to discern the meaning of such signs. The 
enemy is on every side, plying his insidious arts to 
sap the foundations of belief, to hinder the cause of 
God’s Church, and prevent the Word of God from 
doing its work in the conversion of the soul of 
sinful man. No effort is spared to disparage the 
authority of those who witness for the truth and 
uphold the dogmatic teaching for which the Apos- 
tolic writings are at once the model and the warrant. 
Though it be not our purpose to enter upon theo- 
logical discussion, yet our very presence here is a 
witness to our resolution to maintain the faith, 
which we hold in common as our priceless heritage, 
set forth in our Liturgy and other formularies ; and 

82 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

this our united celebration of offices common to our 
respective Churches in each quarter of the globe, is 
a claim, in the face of the world, for the inde- 
pendence of separate Churches, as well as a protest 
against the assumption by any Bishop of the Church 
Catholic of dominion over his fellows in the Episco- 

Not one of us, I am persuaded, can fail to respond 
to that earnest desire for unity which is. expressed 
in the introduction to our resolutions. It is but the 
echo of the petition which the Saviour of the world 
offered in behalf of His Church when He prayed 
the Father that those who should believe in Him 
might all be one in the Father and the Son. And 
while we deplore the divided state of Christendom, 
and mourn over the obstacles which at present exist 
to our all being joined together in the unity of the 
Spirit and in the bond of peace, this very feeling 
should be our most powerful motive to urge our 
petitions at the Throne of Grace, that it may please 
God, in His own good time, to remove such hin- 
drances as at present render that union impracti- 

And now may our Almighty Father shed abroad 
upon us the spirit of wisdom, peace, and love; and 
inspire us with such counsels as may most tend to 
edification ; so that, being knit together more closely 
in the bonds of brotherly affection and Christian 
communion, and animated with a more fervent zeal 
for the Saviour’s honour and the salvation of souls, 
we may do our endeavour to prepare His Church 
for the coming of Him whom. we lovingly adore, 
and whose advent in power and glory we ardently 
look to and long for. 

Amended Programme, Sept. 25, 1867. 83 

No. VI. (See page 16.) 
Amended Programme adopted during the Sesstons. 
SECOND Day.—Wednesday, September 25. 
General Subject for the Day's Discussion, 


Resolution I. :— 
Alteration of Order. 

That His Grace the President of this meeting be 
requested to allow the last Resolution headed 
“ Conditions of Union,’ to be first taken into consi- 

Resolution ITI. :— 
Conditions of Union. 

(2) That in the opinion of this Conference, 
“Unity in the Faith,’ and fellowship in the one 
Body of Christ, will be best maintained among the 
several branches of the Anglican Communion in the 
manner already pointed out by the Convocation of 
the Province of Canterbury: viz., by the due and 
Canonical subordination of the Synods of the several 
_ Branches to the higher authority of the Synods above 
them, the Diocesan Synod being recognised as inferior 
to the Provincial Synod, and the Provincial Synod to 
some higher Synod or Synods of the Anglican 

84 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

Appointment of Committee. 

(ὁ) That a Committee of members (with 
power to add to their number, and to obtain the 
assistance of men learned in Ecclesiastical and Canon 
Law) be appointed to inquire into and report upon 
the whole subject ; and that such report be forwarded 
to His Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, 
with a request that, if possible, it may be communi- 
cated to any adjourned meeting of this Conference. 

Proposed Inquiry into Disunion in Natal. 

(c) That in the judgment of the Bishops now 
assembled, the whole Anglican Communion is deeply 
injured by the present condition of the Church in 
Natal ; and that a Committee be now appointed at 
this General Meeting to consider the whole case, and 
inquire into all the proceedings which have been 
taken therein; and to report on the best mode by 
which the Church may be delivered from the con- 
tinuance of this scandal, and the true faith main- 
tained. That such Report be forwarded to his Grace 
the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, with a request 
that, if possible, it may be communicated to any 
adjourned meeting of the Conference ; and 

Further, that his Grace be requested to transmit 
the same to all the Bishops! of the Anglican Com- 
munion, and to ask for their judgment thereupon. 

Resolution III. :-— 

Question of Appeal. 

That in the opinion of this Conference, it is very 
desirable that there should be a Board of Reference, 

’ ? Convocations, Conventions, and Synods. 

Amended Programme, Sept. 25, 1867. 85 

ora Spiritual Tribunal for final appeal and decision 
in all matters of Faith; including Representatives 
from all Branches of the Anglo-Catholic Church ; 
and the Bishops here assembled earnestly recommend 
this most important matter to the deliberate con- 
sideration of the Convocations, Conventions, and 
Synods of the said Anglo-Catholic Church. 

Or, tf Resolution III. should not be carried, then— 
Question of Appeal. 

III. That in order to the maintenance of the 
strictest union between the Mother-Church of Eng- 
land and her daughter Churches in the Colonies, it is 
desirable that in questions of doctrine there should 
be an appeal from the tribunals for the exercise of 
Discipline in each Province to a spiritual tribunal in 

That such tribunal be presided over by the Primate 
of all England (for the time being), and be composed 
of Bishops only. 

Appointment of Committee. 

That a Committee be appointed to consider the 
details of the Constitution of such tribunal, and that 
their Report be forwarded to His Grace the Lord 
Archbishop of Canterbury, with a request that, if 
possible, it may be communicated to any adjourned 
meeting of the Conference. 

Circulation of Report. 

And further, that his Grace be requested to trans- 
mit the same to the Convocations and Synods of all 
the Provinces of the United Church of England and 
Ireland, and to all Bishops (if any) of the said 
Church not included in any Ecclesiastical Province. 

86 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

Election of Members of Tribunal. 

That His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury be 
requested to invite the several Provinces of the 
Church to elect Bishops for the said Tribunal. 

Resolution IV. :— 
This Meeting to be followed by other Meetings. 

That, in order to give effect to the above Resolu- 
tions, it is desirable that a General Synod of the 
Bishops of the Anglican Communion, accompanied, 
if it be thought fit, by other representatives from each 
Diocese, should be assembled from time to time 
under the Presidency of the Primate of all England. 

Resolution V. :— 
Time of First Meeting, &c. 

That His Grace the Lord Archbishop is hereby 
requested to summon the First Meeting of such 
Synod for the year 187. ; and that in the opinion of 
this Conference the Primate of all England should 
be authorised to summon any Special Synod within 
that time, should the needs of the Church seem to 
require it; or should his Grace be requested to do 
so by or more Bishops. 

Resolution VI. :— 
Conditions of Union. 

That, in order to the binding of the Churches of our 
Colonial Empire and the Missionary Churches beyond 
them in the closest union with the Mother-Church, it 
is necessary that they receive and maintain without 
alteration the standards of Faith and Doctrine, as they 
are in use in that Church. That nevertheless each 

Amended Programme, Sept. 25, 1867. 87 

Province should have the right to make such adapta- 
tions and additions to the services of the Church as its 
peculiar circumstances may require. 

Provided, That no change or addition be made 
inconsistent with the spirit and principles of the Book 
of Common Prayer, and that all such changes be 
liable to revision by any Synod of the Anglican 
Communion in which the said Province shall be 

Resolution VII. :— 
Court of Metropolitans. 

That in case of charges being brought against a 
Suffragan Bishop of any Province it appears to be. 
desirable that the Metropolitan thereof should 
summon all the Bishops of his Province to sit with 
him for the hearing of the case, and that he should 
not proceed to the hearing of it without the aid of all 
the Bishops of the Province that can. be assembled, 
who shall sit with him as judges. 

That the question of any charge brought against a 
Metropolitan be referred to the Committee appointed 
by Resolution ITI. 

Resolution VIII. :— 

Scheme for conducting Election of Bishops, when not 
otherwise provided for. ; 

That it is the opinion of this Conference that the 
election of a Bishop of any Colonial Diocese should 
be made by the Synod of the Diocese convened for 
that purpose, with liberty to delegate this power to 
others. But that no such election should be deemed 
canonically valid until it shall have been confirmed 
by the Bishops of the Province. 

That the rules for the regulation of such elections 
be made by the Synods of the several Provinces. 

88 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

Resolution IX. :— 

Declaration of Submission to Regulations of Synods. 

That all Bishops at their Consecration should be 
required to make a written Declaration of adhesion 
and submission to the regulations agreed upon by the 
General Synod of the Anglican Communion ; and 
that a form of such Declaration be prepared by the 
Committee appointed by Resolution III. 


No. VII. (See page 17.) 

Formal “Address to the Faithful” from the Bishops 
attending the Conference of 1867. 

To the Faithful in Christ Jesus, the Priests and 
Deacons, and the Lay Members of the Church 
of Christ in Communion with the Anglican 
Branch of the Church Catholic,— 

We the undersigned Bishops, gathered under the 
good providence of God for prayer and conference 
at Lambeth, pray for you that ye may obtain grace, 
mercy, and peace from God our Father, and from 
the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour. 

We give thanks to God, brethren beloved, for the 
faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love towards 
the saints, which hath abounded amongst you; and 
for the knowlege of Christ which through you hath 
been spread abroad amongst the most vigorous races 
of the earth; and with one mouth we make our 
supplications to God, even the Father, that by the 
power of the Holy Ghost He would strengthen us 
with His might, to amend amongst us the things 

“Address to the Faithful,’ 1867. 89 

which are amiss, to supply the things which are 
lacking, and to reach forth unto higher measures of 
love and zeal in worshipping Him, and in making 
known His name; and we pray that in His good 
time He would give back unto His whole Church 
the Blessed gift of Unity in Truth. 

And now. we exhort you in love that ye keep 
whole and undefiled the faith once delivered to the 
saints, as ye have received it of the Lord Jesus. 
We entreat you to watch and pray, and to strive 
heartily with us against the frauds and subtleties 
wherewith the faith hath been aforetime and is now 

We beseech you to hold fast, as the sure word 
of God, all the canonical Scriptures of the Old and 
New Testament; and that by diligent study of 
these oracles of God, praying in the Holy Ghost, 
ye seek to know more of the Lord Jesus Christ our 
Saviour, very God and very Man, ever to be adored 
and worshipped, whom they reveal unto us, and of 
the will of God, which they declare. 

Furthermore, we entreat you to guard yourselves 
and yours against the growing superstitions and 
additions with which in these latter days the truth 
of God hath been overlaid; as otherwise, so espe- 
cially by the pretension to universal sovereignty over 
God’s heritage asserted for the See of Rome, and by 
the practical exaltation of the Blessed Virgin Mary 
as mediator in the place of her Divine Son, and by 
the addressing of prayers to her as intercessor be- 
tween God and man. Of such beware, we beseech 
you, knowing that the jealous God giveth not His 
honour to another. 

Build yourselves up, therefore, beloved, in your 
most holy faith; grow in grace and in the know- 
ledge and love of Jesus Christ our Lord. Show 
forth before all men by your faith, self-denial, purity, 
and godly conversation, as well as by your labours 
for the people amongst whom God hath so widely 


90 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

spread you, and by the setting forth of His Gospel 
to the unbelievers and the heathen, that ye are 
indeed the servants of Him who died for us to 
reconcile His Father to us, and to bea sacrifice for 
the sins of the whole world. 

Brethren beloved, with one voice we warn you: 
the time is short; the Lord cometh; watch and 
be sober. Abide steadfast in the Communion of 
Saints, wherein God hath granted you a place. Seek 
in faith for oneness with Christ in the blessed Sacra- 
ment of His body and blood. Hold fast the Creeds 
and the pure worship and order, which of God’s 
grace ye have inherited from the Primitive Church. 
Beware of causing divisions contrary to the doctrine 
ye have received. Pray and seek for unity amongst 
yourselves, and amongst all the faithful in Christ 
Jesus; and the good Lord make you perfect, and 
keep your bodies, souls, and spirits, until the coming 
of the Lord Jesus Christ. 

C. T. Cantuar. Thomas B. Morrell, Coadjutor 
M. G. Armagh. Bishop of Edinburgh. 
R. C. Dublin 
A. C. London. F. Montreal, Metropolitan of 
C. R. Winton. Canada. 
C. St. David’s G. A. New Zealand, Metro- 
J. Lichfield. politan of New Zealand. 
S. Oxon. R. Capetown, Metropolitan of 
Thomas Vowler, St. Asaph. South Africa. 
A. Llandaff. Aubrey G. Jamaica. 
John Lincoln. T. Barbados. 
W. K. Sarum. J. Bombay. 
John T. Norwich. H. Nova Scotia. 
J. C. Bangor. Εις T. Labuan. 
H. Worcester. H. Grahamstown. . 

Charles Wordsworth, D.C.L., H. J. C. Christchurch. 
Bishop of St. Andrew’s, Dun- Mathew Perth. 

keld, and Dumblane. Benj. Huron. 
Thos. G. Suther, Bishop of W. W. Antigua. 
Aberdeen and Orkney. E. H. Sierra Leone. 

William S. Wilson, Bishop of T. N. Honolulu. 
Glasgow and Galloway. J. T. Ontario. 

“Address to the Faithful,’ 1867. 

J. W. Quebec. 

W. J. Gibraltar. 

H. L. Dunedin. 

Edward, Bishop Orange River 
Free State. 

A. N. Niagara. 

William George Tozer, Mis- 
sionary Bishop. 

James B. Kelly, Coadjutor of 

S. Angl. Hierosol. 

John H. Hopkins, Presiding 
Bishop of Pr. Ep. Church, 
in the United States. 

Chas. P. McIlvaine, Bishop of 

α. J. Gloucester and Bristol. 

E. H. Ely. 

William Chester. 

T. L. Rochester. 

Horace Sodor and Man. 

Samuel Meath. 

H. Kilmore. 

Charles Limerick Ardfert and 

Robert Eden, D.D., Bishop of 
Moray, Ross, and Caithness, 

Alexander Ewing, Bishop of 
Argyll and the Isles. 

Manton Eastburn, Bishop of 

J. Payne, Bishop of Cape 
Palmas and parts adjacent. 
H. J. Whitehouse, Bishop of 



Thomas Atkinson, Bishop of 
North Carolina. 

Henry W. Lee, 

Horatio Potter, Bishop of New 

Thomas M. Clark, Bishop of 
Rhode Island. 

Alexander Gregg, Bishop of 

W. H. Odenheimer, Bishop of 
New Jersey. 

G. T. Bedell, Assistant Bishop 
of Ohio. 

Henry C. Lay, Missionary 
Bishop of Arkansas and the 
Indian Territory. 

Jos. C. Talbot, Assistant Bishop 
of Indiana. 

Richard H. Wilmer, Bishop of 

Charles Todd Quintard, Bishop 
of Tennessee. 

John B. Kerfoot, Bishop of 

J. P. B. Wilmer, Bishop of 

C. M. Williams, Missionary 
Bishop to China. 

Bishop of 

J. Chapman, Bishop. 

George Smith, late Bishop of 
Victoria (China). 

David Anderson, late Bishop 
of Rupert’s Land. 

Edmund Hobhouse, Bishep of 
New Zealand. 

92 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

No. VIII. (See page 32.) 

Archdeacon Wordsworth, afterwards Bishop of 
Lincoln, translated the Episcopal Address into Latin 
and Greek, as follows :— 



Fidelibus in Christo Jesu, Presbyteris, Diaconts, et 
Laicis, cum Anglicand parte Ecclesie Catholice 
communicantibus, salutem inDomin 

Nos, qui subscripsimus, Episcopi, benigna Dei 
providentid communium orationum et consiliorum 
causa unanimiter consociati, in Palatio Archiepiscopi 
Cantuariensis Lambethano, obsecrationes pro vobis 
facimus, ut gratiam, misericordiam et pacem con- 
sequamini a Deo Patre Nostro, et a Nostro Salvatore 
Domino Jesu Christo. 

Gratias Deo agimus, fratres carissimi, propter fidem 
in Domino Jesu Christo, et in sanctos dilectionem, 
quz abundavit in vobis; et propter Christi agnitionem, 
quz per vos inter valentissimas orbis universi nationes 
dimanavit ; et uno ore supplicationes offerimus Deo 
et Patri, ut potentia Spiritts Sancti virtute Sua nos 
confortet, ut, que sint apud nos depravata, emendare, 
et, que desint, supplere valeamus; et ut nosmet ipsos 
ad sublimiores dilectionis et zeli mensuras erigamus 
in Illo adorando, et in Nomine Ejus declarando ; 
et enixé Eum apprecamur, ut, beneplacito Ipsius 
tempore, universe Suze Ecclesie beatum restituat 
donum Unitatis in Veritate. 

Latin Version of “ Address” of 1867. 93 

Jam vero, fratres dilecti, vos in caritate cohortamur, 
ut fidem semel sanctis traditam integram atque 
illibatam conservetis, quemadmodum eam accepistis 
a Jesu Christo Domino Nostro. Obsecramus vos, 
vigilate, orate, et nobiscum toto corde certate contra 
fallacias atque argutias, quibus jampridem et in hoc 
ipso tempore fides impugnatur. 

Obtestamur vos, constanter tenete, utpote firmum 
Dei Verbum, omnes Canonicas Scripturas Veteris et 
Novi Testamenti; et diligenti meditatione scrutantes 
hec Dei Oracula, orantes in Spiritu Sancto, queratis 
abundantils cognoscere Dominum Jesum Christum, 
Verum Deum et Verum Hominem, semper colendum 
atque adorandum, Quem nobis illa revelant, et 
Voluntatem Dei in eis patefactam. 

Insuper vos obsecramus, vosmet ipsos et vestros 
custodite contra indies gliscentes superstitiones 
atque additamenta quibus in hisce novissimis tem- 
poribus Veritas Dei incrustatur ; quum in aliis, tum 
precipue per universi principatis affectationem 
dominantis in clero Dei, qui Romane sedia nonnullis 
asseritur ; et per exaltationem, re ipsa manifestam, 
Beatz Virginis Mariz in locum Mediatoris, vice Filii 
ipsius Divini, et per orationes ei oblatas tanquam 
inter Deum et homines Interpellatoris munere 
fungenti. Cavete a talibus, vos obtestamur, probé 
scientes honorem Suum Ipsius non alii dare Deum 

Superedificamini, igitur, fratres carissimi, sanc- 
tissimee fidei vestrze; crescite in gratia et in agnitione 
et dilectione Jesu Christi Domini Nostri. Manifestum 
facite omnibus, per fidem, abstinentiam, puritatem et 
sanctum conversationem, et per vestros labores pro 
populis inter quos Deus vos tam laté propagavit, et 
per Evangelii praedicationem incredulis atque ethnicis, 
vos revera esse servos Illius Qui mortuus est pro 
nobis ut Patrem nobis reconciliaret, et ut pro peccatis 
totius mundi sacrificium Semet Ipsum offerret. 

Fratres dilecti, und voce vos admonemus. Tempus 

94 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

breve est. Dominus venit. Vigilate, sobrii estote. 
State firmi in communione sanctorum in qua vobis 
Deus locum concessit. Studete fide coadunari 
Christo in sanctissimo Corporis Ejus et Sanguinis 
Sacramento. Firma tenete Symbola, et purum illum 
Cultum atque Ordinem, quem gratia Dei a primitiva 
Ecclesia hzreditarium vos possidetis. Cavete ne dis- 
cessiones faciatis preter doctrinam quam accepistis. 
Orate et sectamini Unitatem invicem et inter omnes 
fideles in Jesu Christo. Et Dominus misericors 
perficiat vos, et conservet integrum corpus, animam 
et spiritum vestrum in Adventum Domini Nostri 
Jesu Christi. Amen. 
C. T.Cantuar. Archiepiscopus, et Metropolitanus, 
et totius Angliz Primas. 
M.G. Armagh. Archiepiscopus, et Metropolitanus, 
et totius Hiberniz Primas. 
ΚΝ. C. Dublin. Archiepiscopus, et Metropolitanus, 
et Hiberniz Primas. 
A. C. London. Episcopus. 
Robert Eden, Moray, Ross, Caithness. Episcopus, 
et Scotice Ecclesiz Primas, &c. &c. 


᾿Επισκόπων ἐν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ συνηθροισμένων, ἐν ἡμέραίς 24—27 
μηνὸς Σεπτεμβρίου, ἔτει 1807. 

Τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ, Πρεσβυτέροις, Διακόνοις 
καὶ λαϊκοῖς τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ ᾿Εκκλησίας, συγκοινωνοῖς 
τοῦ Ayydtxod μέρους τῆς Καθολικῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας, χαίρειν 
ἐν Κυρίῳ. 

Ἡμεῖς οἱ ὑπογράψαντες ᾿Επίσκοποι, τῇ ἀγαθῇ τοῦ 
Θεοῦ προνοίᾳ ὁμοθυμαδὸν é ἐπισυνηγμένοι,. κοινῶν προσευ- 
χῶν ἕνεκα καὶ συμβουλεύσεως, ἐ ἐν τῷ τῆς Καντουαρίας 
ἀρχιεπισκόπου παλατίῳ “Ααμβηθανῷ, δεόμεθα ὑπὲρ 
ὑμῶν ἵνα λάβητε χάριν, ἔλεος, καὶ εἰρήνην ἀπὸ Θεοῦ 

Greek Version of “Address” of 1867. 95 

Ilatpos, καὶ tod Κυρίου ἡμῶν καὶ Σωτῆρος *Incov 
ΠΝ ei ay oie, δὲ 

Εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ Θεῷ, ἀδελφοὶ ἀγαπητοὶ, ὑπὲρ τῆς 
πίστεως ὑμῶν ἐν Κυρίῳ ἡμῶν᾽ Τησοῦ Χριστῷ, καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς 
ὠγάπης εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους, ἥτις ἐπερίσσευσεν ἐν ὑμῖν, καὶ 
ὑπὲρ τῆς Χριστοῦ ἐπιγνώσεως, ἣ dv ὑμῶν ἐξήχηται ἐν τοῖς 
ἀνδρειοτάτοις τῆς οἰκουμένης ἔθνεσιν: καὶ ἑνὶ στόματι 
δεήσεις ποιούμεθα πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν καὶ Πατέῤα, ἵνα τῇ 
τοῦ ᾿Αγίου Πνεύματος δυνάμει σθενώσῃ ἡμᾶς τῇ ἰσχῦι 
Αὐτοῦ, εἰς τὸ ἐπανορθῶσαι τὰ παραπίπτοντα, καὶ τὰ 
λείποντα ἀναπληρῶσαι, καὶ ἐπεκτείνεσθαι εἰς ὑψηλότερα 
ἀγάπης μέτρα καὶ ζήλου ἐν τῷ λατρεύειν αὐτῷ, καὶ ἐν τῷ 
γνωρίζειν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ καὶ προσευχόμεθα ἵνα ἐν τῷ 
δεκτῷ αὐτοῦ καιρῷ ἀποδῷ τῇ ὅλῃ Αὐτοῦ ἐκκλησιᾳ τὸ 
μακαριστὸν χάρισμα τῆς ἑνότητος ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ. 

Καὶ νῦν, ἀδελφοὶ, παρακαλοῦμεν ὑμᾶς ἐν ἀγάπῃ, ἵνα 
τηρῆτε ὁλόκληρον καὶ ἀδιάφθορον τὴν ἅπαξ παραδοθεῖσαν 
τοῖς ἁγίοις πίστιν, καθὼς αὐτὴν παρειλήφατε ἀπὸ τοῦ 
Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ. ᾿Ερωτῶμεν ὑμᾶς ἵνα γρηγορῆτε καὶ 
προσεύχησθε, καὶ ἀγωνίζησθε εὐκαρδίως μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν κατὰ 
τῶν πανουργιῶν καὶ μεθοδειῶν, δι’ ὧν ἡ πίστις τὸ πρὶν 
καὶ ἐν τῷ νῦν παρόντι χρόνῳ πορθεῖται. 

Παρακαλοῦμεν ὑμᾶς ἵνα ἀσφαλῶς κρατῆτε, ὡς βέβαιον 
Θεοῦ λόγον, πάσας τὰς κανονικὰς γραφὰς τῆς Παλαιᾶς 
καὶ τῆς Καινῆς Διαθήκης, καὶ ἵνα, σπουδαίως ἐρευνῶντες 
ταῦτα τὰ λόγια τοῦ Θεοῦ, ζητῆτε περισσοτέρως γνῶναι 
τὸν Κύριον καὶ Σ᾽ ωτῆρα ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστὸν, Θεὸν ἀληθινὸν 
καὶ ἄνθρωπον ἀληθινὸν, ᾧ πάντοτε προσκυνεῖν δεῖ καὶ 
λατρεύειν, ὃν ai γραφαὶ ἡμῖν ἀνακαλύπτουσιν, καὶ τὸ 
θέλημα τοῦ Θεοῦ, τὸ ἐν αὐταῖς φανερούμενον. 

“Apa δὲ ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοὶ, διαμαρτυρόμεθα, φυλάξατε 
ἑαυτοὺς καὶ τοὺς ὑμετέρους ἀπὸ τῶν ἀεὶ αὐξανομένων 
ἐθελοθρησκειῶν καὶ ἐπιβληλημάτων, Sv’ ὧν ἡ τοῦ Θεοῦ 
ἀλήθεια ἐν τοῖς ὑστέροις τούτοις χρόνοις παραπέπλασται, 
ἄλλως τε καὶ μάλιστα διὰ τῆς ἀντιποιήσεως μοναρχίας 
οἰκουμενικῆς, κατακυριευούσης τοῦ κλήρου τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἧς 
ἀξιοῦται παρὰ τισιν ἡ Ῥώμης καθέδρα; ἔτι δὲ διὰ τῆς 
ἐνεργοῦ ὑπεράρσεως τῆς μακαρίας Παρθένου Μαρίας εἰς 
τόπον Mecirov, ἀντὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ αὐτῆς αὐτοθέου, καὶ διὰ 

96 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

προσευχῶν αὐτῇ προσφερομένων ὡς ἐντυγχανούσῃ ὑπὲρ 
ἀνθρώπων παρὰ Θεῷ. “Προσέχετε ἀπὸ τοιούτων, 
εἰδότες ὅ ὅτι τὴν τιμὴν ἑαυτοῦ οὐχ ἑτέρῳ δίδωσιν ὁ ζηλω- 
τὴς Θεός. 

: a 9 3 Gate ἂν τ τ A ΄ αὐ τῆς 

Εποικοδομεῖσθε οὖν, ἀγαπητοὶ, ἐπὶ τῇ ἁγιωτάτῃ ὑμῶν 
πίστει" αὐξάνεσθε ἐν χάριτι καὶ γνώσει καὶ ἀγάπῃ τοῦ 
Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Karadei~ate ἐνώπιο» 
πάντων, διὰ τῆς πίστεως, αὐταπαρνήσεως, ἁγνείας, καὶ 
εὐσεβοῦς ἀναστροφῆς, ἅμα δὲ διὰ τῶν ὑμετέρων κόπων 
ὑπὲρ τῶν λαῶν ἐν οἷς ὁ Θεὸς ὑμᾶς εἰς τοσοῦτον εὖρος 
διαπεφύτευκε, καὶ διὰ τοῦ κηρύγματος τοῦ εὐαγγελίου 
τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, ὅτι τῷ ὄντι ἐστὲ δοῦλοι 
᾿Εκείνου, ὃ ὃς ἀπέθανεν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, ἵνα καταλλάξῃ ἡ ἡμῖν 
τὸν Πατέρα, καὶ ἵνα θυσίαν “Eavtov ἀνενέγκῃ ὑπὲρ τῶν 
ἁμαρτιῶν ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου. 

᾿Αδελφοὶ ἀγαπητοὶ, μιᾷ φωνῇ νουθετοῦμεν ὑμᾶς" ὁ 
καιρὸς συνεσταλμένος" ὁ Κύριος ἔρχεται γρηγορεῖτε, 
νήφετε. Στήκετε ἑδραῖον ἐν τῇ κοινωνίᾳ τῶν ἁγίων, ἐν 
ἢ Θεὸς ὑμῖν μερίδα κεχάρισται" ζητεῖτε ἐν πίστει 
ἑνοῦσθαι τῷ Χριστῷ ἐν τῷ εὐλογημένῳ μυστηρίῳ τοῦ 
σώματος Αὐτοῦ καὶ αἵματος. Κατέχετε στερεῶς τὰ 
Σ ὕμβολα, καὶ τὴν καθαρὰν θρησκείαν καὶ τάξιν, ἣν 
χάριτι Θεοῦ κεκληρονομήκατε ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆθεν ἐκκλης- 
σίας. Βλέπετε μὴ διχοστασίας, ποιῆτε κατὰ τῆς 
διδαχῆς ἣ ἣν ἐμάθετε. ᾿Ερωτᾶτε καὶ διώκετε ἐνότητα ἐν 
ἑαυτοῖς, καὶ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ" καὶ 
ὁ χρηστὸς Κύριος τελειώσαι ὑμᾶς, καὶ τηρήσαι ὑμῶν τὸ 
σῶμα, τὴν ψυχὴν, καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα, εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ 
Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ. ᾿Αμήν. 

Ο. T. CantTuaR. ἀρχιεπίσκοπος, καὶ μητροπολίτης, 
καὶ πρῶτος ὅλης τῆς ᾿Αγγλίας. 

M.G. ARMAGH. ἀρχιεπίσκοπος, καὶ μητροπολίτης, 
καὶ πρῶτος ὅλης τῆς Ἱβερνίας. 

R. C. Duspiin. ἀρχιεπίσκοπος, καὶ μητροπολίτης, 
καὶ πρῶτος IBepvias. 

A. C. ΤΌΝΡΟΝ. ἐπίσκοπος. 

Ο. R. Winton. ἐπίσκοπος, 



No. IX. (See page 17.) 

The Formal Resolutions of the Conference of 
Sept. 24-27, 1867. 


“We, Bishops of Christ’s Holy Catholic Church 
in visible Communion with the United Church of 
England and Ireland, professing the Faith delivered 
to us in Holy Scripture, maintained by the Primitive 
Church and by the Fathers of the English Reforma- 
tion, now assembled, by the good providence of God, 
at the Archiepiscopal Palace of Lambeth, under 
the presidency of the Primate of all England, desire 
—First, to give hearty thanks to Almighty God 
for having thus brought us together for common 
counsels and united worship ; Secondly, we desire to 
express the deep sorrow with which we view the 
divided condition of the flock of Christ throughout 
the world, ardently longing for the fulfilment of the 
prayer of our Lord, ‘ That all may be one, as Thou, 
Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may 
be one in us, that the world may believe that Thou 
hast sent Με; and, Lastly, we do here solemnly 
record our conviction that unity will be most effec- 
tually promoted by maintaining the Faith in its 
purity and integrity—as taught in the Holy Scrip- 
tures, held by the Primitive Church, summed up in 
the Creeds, and affirmed by the undisputed General 
Councils,—and by drawing each of us closer to our 
common Lord, by giving ourselves to much prayer 
and intercession, by the cultivation of a spirit of 
charity, and a love of the Lord’s appearing.” 
Resolution I—*“ That it appears to us expedient, 
for the purpose of maintaining brotherly intercom- 
munion, that all cases of establishment of new Sees, 
and appointment of new Bishops, be notified to all 

98 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

Archbishops and Metropolitans, and all presiding 
Bishops of the Anglican Communion.” 

Resolution II.— That, having regard to the con- 
ditions under which intercommunion between mem- 
bers of the Church passing from one distant Diocese 
to another may be duly maintained, we hereby 
declare it desirable,— 

“(1) That forms of Letters Commendatory on 
behalf of Clergymen visiting other Dioceses be drawn 
up and agreed upon ; 

“(2) That a form of Letters Commendatory for lay 
members of the Church be in like manner prepared ; 

“(3) That his Grace the Lord Archbishop of 
Canterbury be pleased to undertake the preparation 
of such forms.” 

Resolution III.—* That a Committee be appointed 
to draw up a Pastoral Address to all members of the 
Church of Christ in communion with the Anglican 
Branch of the Church Catholic, to be agreed upon 
by the assembled Bishops, and to be published as 
soon as possible after the last sitting of the Con- 

Resolution IV.—* That, in the opinion of this 
Conference, Unity in Faith and Discipline will be 
best maintained among the several branches of 
the Anglican Communion by due and canonical sub- 
ordination of the Synods of the several branches to 
the higher authority of a Synod or Synods above 

Resolution V.—“ That a Committee of seven 
members (with power to add to their number, and 
to obtain the assistance of men learned in Eccle- 
siastical and Canon Law) be appointed to inquire 
into and report upon the subject of the relations and 
functions of such Synods, and that such Report be 
forwarded to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of 
Canterbury, with a request that, if possible, it may 
be communicated to any adjourned meeting of this 

Formal Resolutions of Sepi., 1867. 99 

Resolution VI.—“ That, in the judgment of the 
Bishops now assembled, the whole Anglican Com- 
munion is deeply injured by the present condition 
of the Church in Natal; and that a Committee be 
now appointed at this General Meeting to report 
on the best mode by which the Church may be 
delivered from the continuance of this scandal, and 
the true faith maintained. That such Report be 
forwarded to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of 
Canterbury, with the request that he will be pleased 
to transmit the same to all the Bishops of the 
Anglican Communion, and to ask for their judgment 

Resolution VII.—* That we who are here present 
do acquiesce in the Resolution of the Convocation 
of Canterbury, passed on June 29, 1866, relating to 
the Diocese of Natal, to wit— 

“<“Tf it be decided that a new Bishop should be 
consecrated,— As to the proper steps to be taken 
by the members of the Church in the province of 
Natal for obtaining a new Bishop, it is the opinion 
of this House,—/jirs¢, that a formal instrument, de- 
claratory of the doctrine and discipline of the Church 
of South Africa should be prepared, which every 
Bishop, Priest, and Deacon to be appointed to office 
should be required to subscribe ; secondly, that a 
godly and well-learned man should be chosen by 
the clergy, with the assent of the lay-communicants 
of the Church; and; ¢#zrdly, that he should be pre- 
sented for consecration, either to the Archbishop of 
Canterbury,—if the aforesaid instrument should de- 
clare the doctrine and discipline of Christ as received 
by the United Church of England and Ireland,—or 
to the Bishops of the Church of South Africa, accord- 
ing as hereafter may be judged to be most advisable 
and convenient.’ ” 

Resolution VIII.—* That, in order to the binding 
of the Churches of our Colonial Empire and the 
Missionary Churches beyond them in the closest 

100 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

union with the Mother-Church, it is necessary that 
they receive and maintain without alteration the 
standards of Faith and Doctrine as now in use in 
that Church. That, nevertheless, each Province 
should have the right to make such adaptations and 
additions to the services of the Church as its peculiar 
circumstances may require. Pvrovzded, that no change 
or addition be made inconsistent with the spirit and 
principles of the Book of Common Prayer, and that 
all such changes be liable to revision by any Synod 
of the Anglican Communion in which the said 
Province shall be represented.” 

Resolution IX.—“ That the Committee appointed 
by Resolution V., with the addition of the names of 
the Bishops of London, St. David’s, and Oxford, and 
all the Colonial Bishops, be instructed to consider 
the constitution of a voluntary spiritual tribunal, to 
which questions of doctrine may be carried by appeal 
from the tribunals for the exercise of discipline in 
each Province of the Colonial Church, and that their 
report be forwarded to his Grace the Lord Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury, who is requested to communi- 
cate it to an adjourned meeting of this Conference.” 

Resolution X.— That the resolutions submitted 
to this Conference relative to the discipline to be 
exercised by Metropolitans, the Court of Metropo- 
litans, the scheme for conducting the Election of 
Bishops, when not otherwise provided for, the decla- 
ration of submission to the Regulation of Synods, 
and the question of what Legislation should be pro- 
posed for the Colonial Churches, be referred to the 
Committee specified in the preceding Resolution.” 

Resolution XI.—“ That a special committee be 
appointed to consider the Resolutions relative to the 
notification of proposed Missionary Bishoprics, and 
the Subordination of Missionaries.” 

Resolution XII.—‘ That the question of the bounds 
of the jurisdiction of different Bishops, when any 
question may have arisen in regard to them, the 

Correspondence with Dean Stanley. IOI 

question as to the obedience of Chaplains of the 
United Church of England and Ireland on the Con- 
tinent, and the Resolution submitted to the Confer- 
ence relative to their return and admission into 
Home Dioceses, be referred to the Committee spe- 
cified in the preceding Resolution.” 

Resolution XIII.—* That we desire to render our 
hearty thanks to Almighty God for the blessings 
vouchsafed to us in and by this Conference; and we 
desire to express our hope that this our meeting may 
hereafter be followed by other meetings to be con- 
ducted in the same spirit of brotherly love.” 

No. X. (See page 18.) 

Correspondence with the Dean of Westminster respect- 
ing the use of Westminster Abbey in connection 
with the Conference of 1867. 

1. The Dean of Westminster to the Archbishop of 

September 21, 1867. 


I have been honoured with a communication from 
your Grace, through the Bishop of London, request- 
ing the use of Westminster Abbey for a special 
service to be held for the English, American, and 
Scottish Bishops now assembled in England, to be 
held, as I understood, on September 28. 

On all occasions it is my earnest desire to render 
the Abbey and the precincts of Westminster available 
for purposes of general utility and edification, and 
this desire is increased when the request comes from 
your Grace. 

You will kindly allow me to state the difficulty 

102 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

which I feel in the present instance. I have endea- 
voured to act in such matters on the rule of granting 
the use of the Abbey to such purposes, and such 
only, as are either co-extensive with the Church of 
England, or have a definite object of usefulness or 
charity, apart from party or polemical considerations. 

Your Grace will, I am sure, see that, however 
much your Grace’s intentions would have brought 
the proposed Conference at Lambeth within this 
sphere, in fact, it can hardly be so considered. The 
absence of the Primate and the larger part of the 
Bishops of the Northern Province—not to speak of 
the Bishops of India and Australia, and of other 
important Colonial or Missionary Sees—must, even 
irrespectively of other indications, cause it to present a 
partial aspect of the English Church; whilst the 
appearance of other prelates not belonging to our 
Church, places it on a different footing from the 
institutions which are confined to the Church of 
England. And, further, the absence of any fixed 
information as to the objects to be discussed and 
promoted by the Conference, leaves me, in common 
with all who stand outside, in uncertainty as to what 
would be the proposals or measures which would 
receive, by implication, the sanction given by the 
use of the Abbey—a sanction which, in the case of a 
church so venerable and national in its character, 
ought, I conceive, to be lent only to public objects of 
well-defined or acknowledged beneficence. 

These are the grounds why I hesitate to take upon 
myself the responsibility suggested. But, when 
stating this difficulty, I feel so strongly the value of 
the friendly intercourse to promote which has been 
the chief intention of your Grace, and of, I doubt 
not, many of the prelates who have concurred in 
this Conference; and I am so desirous that the 
Abbey should be made to minister to the edification 
of large sections of our Church, even when not re- 
presenting the whole, and of those outside our 

Correspondence with Dean Stanley. 103 

own immediate pale (especially our brethren from 
America), who are willing to co-operate with us in 
all things lawful and good—that I would gladly, if 
possible, join in advancing such a purpose. 

It has occurred to me, that, as the service indicated 
by your Grace is to be held after the Conference is 
finished, the Abbey might be granted for it, without 
any relation to the Conference itself; but either for 
some specific object, such as the Society for the 
Propagation of the Gospel, or for other Home or 
Foreign Missions of unquestioned importance, or 
else (in those general terms which, as I apprehend, 
express your Grace’s wishes) for the promotion of 
brotherly goodwill and mutual edification amongst 
all members of the Anglican Communion. 

Under these circumstances, and on this under- 
standing, which I should wish to be made as public 
as the announcement of the service itself, I should 
have great pleasure in the permitting the use of the 
Abbey for such a service, to be held in the morning 
or afternoon of September 28th (as may be deemed 
most convenient), and I trust that, if this meets your 
Grace’s wishes, your Grace will undertake to preach 
on the occasion. 

I beg to remain, my dear Lord Archbishop, 
Yours faithfully and respectfully, 

2. Lhe Archbishop of Canterbury to the Dean of 

September 25, 1867. 


I laid your note before the Conference yesterday, 
but it will probably not close its sittings on Friday 
evening, as there is reason to believe that committees 

104 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

will be appointed to report at a future date. Under 
these circumstances, it is obvious, from the tenor of 
your letter, that the Abbey is not open to us. I 
regret, therefore, that we shall not be able to avail 
ourselves of your kind offer, under the specified 

Believe me, my dear Dean, 

Yours very truly, 

3. Lhe Dean of Westminster to the Archbishop of 

September 27, 1867. 


I have to acknowledge, with thanks, your Grace’s 
letter of the 25th, and to express my regret that 
your Grace and the Bishops assembled should have 
felt themselves precluded from accepting my proposal 
—in reply to your Grace’s request—to meet in the 
Abbey for “some specific object of charity or useful- 
ness,’ or for the purpose of promoting brotherly 
goodwill and mutual edification amongst all members 
of the Anglican Communion. 

I beg, however, that you will assure the prelates 
assembled, especially those of our American brethren, 
for whose sake, as I stated in my former letter, I 
especially proposed to grant the use of the Abbey as 
before mentioned; that if they, or any of them 
should wish to attend the services in the Abbey on 
Sunday next (at Io a.m. or at 3 p.m.) every accom- 
modation and welcome shall be afforded. 

I beg to remain, my dear Lord Archbishop, 

Yours faithfully and respectfully, 

Correspondence with Dean Stanley. 105 

4. The Dean of Westminster to the Bishop of Vermont, 
Presiding Bishop of the American Church. 

October 1, 1867. 


Understanding that there has been’ some mis- 
apprehension on the part of the American bishops 
as to their invitation to a service in Westminster 
Abbey, I beg that you will do me the favour of 
communicating the following statement, in as public 
a way as you may think fit, to your Episcopal 

It was impossible for me, as guardian of a building 
like the Abbey, which belongs to the whole Church 
and people of England, to take the responsibility of 
giving its sanction to a meeting which included only 
a portion of the English bishops, and of which the 
objects were undefined, the issues unknown, and the 
discussions secret. But I was so anxious to show 
every courtesy to the bishops from the United 
States, that, chiefly on their own account, as I par- 
ticularly specified in my letter to the Archbishop of 
Canterbury, I so far deviated from the usual rules 
which guide the services in the Abbey as to propose 
the use of the Abbey for a service which should 
gather them there, either for some specific object of 
usefulness or charity or for the general promotion of 
goodwill and edification amongst all members of the 
Anglican Communion. I was encouraged the more 
to make this offer by the pledge that I had received 
that no questions exciting party differences should 
be introduced into the meetings, and I was therefore 
in hopes that his Grace would have felt himself able 
to accept a proposal which I had reason to believe 
would be gratifying to our American brethren. 

The proposal was, however, declined ; and I must 
therefore, through you, beg to express my regret that 
such an opportunity was lost of cultivating those 


106 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

feelings of amity between the two countries which 
are at all times so welcome. 

The circumstances of the severe domestic affliction 
which has recently befallen us, whilst they prevented 
me from showing that hospitality which I should 
otherwise have offered to you, make me doubly 
anxious that, in a country from which we have 
received expressions of such sincere sympathy, there 
should be no misunderstanding as to the cordial 
desire that I entertain to welcome Americans on all 
occasions to our joint national sanctuary. 

I trust that on some future occasion I may take 
the opportunity of renewing personally my assurance 
of the pleasure which it will ever give me to receive 
the citizens of a nation in which we must always feel 
peculiar interest. 

I beg to remain, 

Yours faithfully, 

No. XI. (See page 18.) 

Sermon of Bishop Fulford, of Montreal, preached 
in Lambeth Parish Church on September 28, 

Bishop Fulford’s sermon was not published, but the following 
compressed report of it appeared in the Guardian of October 
2, 1867, p. 1058 :-— 

“The Bishop of Montreal selected as his text, 
Psalm iv. 6. ‘There be many that say, who will 
shew us any good?’ ‘The Bishop observed : 

“Tf no public notice had been given of the fact, 
it might be perceived from the presence of so many 
of those Bishops who had been attending the meeting 
lately held in Lambeth Palace, that there was a 

Sermon of the Bishop of Montreat. 107 

special connection of the service of the day with 
the meeting. The business before the Conference 
was not entirely closed, because there were some 
committees appointed to carry out certain. details and 
principles, especially in connection with the Colonial 
Church, and they would have to make their report 
at an adjourried meeting. But that, however, which 
concerned the whole community had been discussed, 
and a very important and solemn pastoral letter had 
been adopted, and signed unanimously by every 
member of the conference, to be sent out to the 
whole world. It was thought fitting that, as the 
Bishops had met in such large numbers, they should 
close their conference with a special service, and the 
celebration of the Holy Communion. He (the 
Bishop of Montreal) had undertaken to occupy the 
office on that occasion, at the request of the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury, at very short notice, but he 
should endeavour to discharge the duty imposed 
upon him to the best of his ability. No one felt 
more fully than he did the importance of the meet- 
ing they had held, both as to what they had done 
and said, and what they had left undone and unsaid. 
And no one was more deeply sensible than himself 
of how much they owed to the Christian courage 
‘and large-heartedness which had enabled the Arch- 
bishop to make this great venture, and of his gentle, 
manly conduct and courtesy, in presiding over so 
large a gathering, and in bringing it to so successful an 
issue. How many persons had said, ‘Who will shew 
us any good?’ But, notwithstanding the sneers of 
the scornful, between seventy and eighty Bishops, 
holding Office in the Church of Christ, and re- 
presenting the Anglican branch (in former years 
represented as confined to the British Isles), had 
come together at the Archbishop’s invitation, so that 
every portion of the Church in every quarter of the 
globe had one representative or many representatives 
present. Some had come 10,000 or 12,000 miles to 
H 2 

Ιοϑ Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

be present, and if they had done nothing more’than 
give physical testimony to their oneness of faith and 
resolve upon that solemn pastoral, they would have 
done more for the unity of the Church than had been 
accomplished for the last 100 years. The Conference, 
however, had not confined its attention to that im- 
portant document ; many other matters had received 
earnest attention ; and in the interchange of thought 
- from minds of such different constitution, trained in 
so many different schools, moulded by such varying 
circumstances, living in such diverse positions, and 
influenced by such various surroundings, they had 
learnt to know and to love each other: the lesson has 
been of incalculable importance, and he thanked 
God for the great benefit which had thus been 
conferred upon all of them. Invitations to attend 
had been issued to 144 Bishops ; many were utterly 
unable to accept it, and only a very small portion of 
them were not anxious to attend. All of these 
bishoprics had derived their existence and succession 
from the See of Canterbury, and between sixty and 
seventy were the result of the progress of the last few 
years. As regarded Canada, he had only to look 
back for sixteen years, when that province certainly 
possessed Bishops and a small number of mission- 
aries, but the Church had no system of united actiom, 
and no concentrated method of order and government. 
But there was a meeting held at Quebec, such as the 
present gathering had been, and from it had sprung 
a regular system of synodical action, which was now 
in full vigour and power, and regularly constituted, 
and which progressed harmoniously, so that there 
was every reason to consider the Church in Canada 
as an established branch of Christ’s holy Catholic 
Church. Then, again, in the United States, which 
had been so ably and so worthily represented at this 
Conference, he could but remember with feelings of 
gratitude the last General Convention of the Epis- 
copal Church which he was privileged to attend. It 

Sermon of the Bishop of Montreal. 109 

was gathered together immediately after the country 
had been torn by internal dissensions, and when the 
whole social system had been rent by political dis- 
turbances. It was feared that the South would not 
again join the North; that political differences and 
party jealousy would prevent reunion; but God's 
providence ruled otherwise, and it was a most im- 
posing sight, and one he could never forget, when 
the Bishops of the South took their accustomed 
places as before that unhappy war ;—yes, that sight 
caused tears to flow down many a manly cheek, and 
when the aged prelates who presided, called aloud for 
a thanksgiving, their voices rose together even as one, 
shouting Gloria in excelsis Deo. And so with our 
own branch of the Church at home, it may have its 
trials and difficulties, but it was becoming day by 
day more instinct with energy and zeal. What ever 
threatening aspects might hover over her, she was 
yet a great and unspeakable blessing to the nation ; 
she was great through herself.and through her 
children ; but she would be the greatest of all if she 
remained true to her noble mission and faithful to 
her Lord, the great Head of the Church ; and thus he 
trusted that both in its present and future influences, 
the Conference just concluded might be fraught 
with increasing blessings to her and to her faithful 

110 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

No. XII. (See page 19.) 


A.—Report of the Committee appointed under Re- 
solution V., by the Conference of Bishops of the 
Anglican Communion, held at Lambeth Palace, 
September 24-27th, 18671 | 

The subject of the functions and relations of the 
several Synods, on which the Committee is appointed 
to report, appears to them to be necessarily connected 
with questions as to the constitution of these bodies, 
The following Report, therefore, embraces the whole 
subject of Synods. In discussing it, your Committee 
deems it necessary to deal with the question in the 
abstract, without reference to existing laws and 
usages in the several branches of the Anglican Com- 
munion, and to lay down general principles, the 
adoption or application of which must depend on 
circumstances, such, for example, as the laws which 
any Church may have inherited or already esta- 

1 Resolution IV.—‘ That, in the opinion of this Conference, 
Unity in Faith and Discipline will be best maintained among 
the several branches of the Anglican Communion by due and 
canonical subordination of the Synods of the several branches 
to the higher authority of a Synod or Synods above them.” 

Resolution V.—‘‘ That a Committee of seven members (with 
power to add to their number, and to obtain the assistance of 
men learned in Ecclesiastical and Canon Law) be appointed to 
inquire into and report upon the subject of the relations and 
functions of such Synods, and that such Report be forwarded 
to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, with a request 
that, if possible, it may be communicated to any adjourned 
meeting of this Conference.” 

Reports of Committees, 1867. III 

I.—In the organisation of Synodal order for the 
government of the Church, the Diocesan Synod 
appears to be the primary and simplest form of such 

By the Diocesan Synod the co-operation of all 
members of the body is obtained in Church action ; 
and that acceptance of Church rules is secured, 
which, in the absence of other law, usage, or enact- 
ment, gives to these rules the force of laws “ binding 
on those who, expressly or by implication, have 
consented to them.” 4 

For this reason, wherever the Church is not 
established by law, it is, in the judgment of your 
Committee, essential to order and good government 
that the Diocese should be organised by a Synod. 

Your Committee consider that it is not at variance 
with the ancient principles of the Church, that both 
Clergy and Laity should attend the Diocesan Synod, 
and that it is expedient that the Synod should con- 
sist of the Bishop and Clergy of the Diocese, with 
Representatives of the Laity. 

The constitution of the Diocesan Synod may be 
determined either by rules for that branch of the 
Church established by the Synod of the Province, or 
by general consent in the Diocese itself, its rules 
being sanctioned afterwards by the Provincial Synod 

Your Committee, however, recommend that the 
following general rules should be adopted ; viz., that 
the Bishop, Clergy, and Laity should sit together, 
the Bishop presiding ; that votes should be taken by 
orders, whenever demanded ; and that the concurrent 
assent of Bishop, Clergy, and Laity should be 
necessary to the validity of all acts of the Synod. 

They consider that the Clerical members of the 
Synod should be those Clergy who are recognized 
by the Bishop, according to the rules of the Church 

1 Judgment of Judicial Committee of Privy Council in case 
of Long v. Bishop of Capetown. 1 Moore, P.C.C., N.S., 461. 

112 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

in that Diocese, as being under his jurisdiction. 
Whether in large Dioceses, when the Clergy are very 
numerous, they might appear by representation, is a 
difficult question, and one on which your Committee 
are not prepared to express an opinion. 

The Lay Representatives in the Synod ought, in 
the judgment of your Committee, to be Male Com- 
municants of at least one year’s standing in the 
Diocese, and of the full age of twenty-one. It should 
be required that the electors should be Members 
of the Church in that Diocese, and belong to the 
parish in which they claim to vote. It appears 
desirable that the regular meetings of the Synod 
should be fixed and periodical; but that the right 
of convening special meetings whenever they may 
be required should be reserved to the Bishop. 

The office of the Diocesan Synod is, generally, to 
make regulations, not repugnant to those of higher 
Synods, for the order and good government of the 
Church within the Diocese, and to promulgate the 
decisions of the Provincial Synod. — 

II.—The Provincial Synod—or, as it is called in 
New Zealand, the General Synod, and in the United 
States the General Convention—is formed, whenever 
it does not exist already by law and usage, through 
the voluntary association of Dioceses for united 
legislation and common action. The Provincial 
Synod not only provides a method for securing unity 
amongst the Dioceses which are thus associated, but 
also forms the link between these Dioceses and other 
Churches of the Anglican Communion. 

Without questioning the right of the Bishops of any 
Province to meet in Synod by themselves, and without 
affirming that the presence of others is essential to a 
Provincial Synod, your Committee recommend that, 
whenever no law or usage to the contrary already 
exists, it should consist of the Bishops of the Province, 
and of Representatives both of the Clergy and of the 
Laity in each Diocese. 

Reports of Committees, 1867. 113 

Your Committee need not define the method in 
which a Provincial Synod may be first constituted, 
but they assume that its constitution and rules will be 
determined by the concurrence of the several Dioceses 
duly represented. 

Your Committee consider that it must be left to 
each Province to decide whether, and under what 
circumstances, the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity in a 
Provincial Synod should sit and discuss questions in 
the same chamber or separately ; but, in the judg- 
ment of the Committee, the votes should in either 
case be taken by orders ; and the concurrent assent 
of Bishops, Clergy,and Laity should be necessary for 
any legislative action, wherever the Clergy and Laity 
form part of the constitution of a Provincial Synod ; 
such powers and functions not involving legislation 
being reserved as belong to the Bishops by virtue of 
their office. 

The number, qualification, and mode of election of 
the Clerical and Lay Representatives from each 
Diocese must be determined by the Synods in the 
several Provinces. 

It is the office of the Provincial Synod, generally, 
to exercise, within the limits of the Province, powers 
in regard to Provincial questions similar to those 
which the Diocesan Synod exercises, within the 
Diocese, in regard to Diocesan questions. 

As to the relation between these two Synods, your 
Committee are of opinion that the Diocese is bound 
to accept positive enactments of a Provincial Synod 
in which it is duly represented, and that no Diocesan 
regulations have force, if contrary to the decisions of 
a higher Synod ; but that, in order to prevent any 
collision or misunderstanding, the spheres of action 
of the several Synods should be defined on the follow- 
ing principle, viz., That the Provincial Synod should 
deal with questions of common interest to the whole 
Province, and with those which affect the communion 
of the Dioceses with one another and with the rest of 

114 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

the Church ; whilst the Diocesan Synod should be 
left free to dispose of matters of local interest, and to 
manage the affairs of the Diocese. 

From this principle your Committee draws the 
following conclusions :— 

I. All alterations in the Services of the Church, 
required by circumstances in the Province, should be 
made or authorized by the Provincial Synod, and not 
merely by the Diocesan. : 

2. The rule of discipline for the Clergy of the 
Province should be framed by the Provincial Synod. 

3. Rules for the trial of Clergy should be made by 
the Provincial Synod ; but, in default of such action 
on the part of that Synod, the Diocesan Synod should 
establish provisional rules for this purpose. The 
Provincial Tribunal of Appeal should be established 
by the Provincial Synod. 

4. In questions relating to Patronage, the tenure 
of Church property, Parochial divisions, arrange- 
ments, officers, &c., there should be joint action of 
the Diocese and the Province; the former making 
such regulations as may be best suited to develop 
local resources, the latter providing against the ad- 
mission of any principle inexpedient for the common 
interests of the Church. 

5. The erection of a new Diocese within the limits 
of an existing Diocese should proceed by general 
rules established by the Provincial Synod. 

6. The question of the election of a Bishop it is 
unnecessary here to consider, as it is submitted to 
another Committee. 

III.—The question of a Riher Synod of the 
Anglican Communion, and of the relation which the 
inferior Synods should hold towards it, whenever it 
might assemble, is one, your Committee are aware, 
of much greater difficulty than any of those which 
have been previously considered. 

The fact, however, that a Conference of Bishops 
of the whole Anglican Communion has already met 

Reports of Committees, 1867. 115 

together, is of itself an indication of the need which 
is generally felt of united counsel in a sphere more 
extensive than that of a Provincial Synod. Indeed, 
the Resolutions under which this Committee was 
appointed contemplate the possibility at least of 
some Synod being established superior to the Pro- 
vincial. It is also implied in Resolution VIII. of 
this Conference, that some such Assembly may be 
required, in order to preserve Colonial and Missionary 
Churches in close union with the Church of England, 
since it is provided that all changes in the Services 
of the Church made by one of their Provincial Synods 
should “be liable to revision by any Synod of the 
Anglican Communion in which the said Province 
should be represented.” 

The objections that may be urged against the 
united action of Churches which are more or less. free 
to act independently, and other Churches whose 
constitution is fixed, not only by ancient ecclesiastical 
laws and usages, but by the law of the State, are 
obvious; but it appears to your Committee that the 
action of this Conference has proved that the diffi- 
culties which are anticipated are not insuperable, and 
suggests the method by which they may be overcome. 
Under present circumstances, indeed, no Assembly 
that might be convened would be competent to enact 
canons of binding ecclesiastical authority on these 
different bodies, or to frame definitions of faith which 
it would be obligatory on the Churches of the 
Anglican Communion to accept. It would be neces- 
sary, therefgre, in the judgment of your Committee, 
to avoid all terms respecting this Assembly that 
might imply authority of this nature, and to call it 
a Congress, if even the term Council should be con- 
sidered open to objection. Its decisions could only 
possess the authority which might be derived from 
the moral weight of such united counsels and judg- 
ments, and from the voluntary acceptance of its con- 
clusions by any of the Churches there represented. 

116 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

Your Committee consider that his Grace the 
Archbishop of Canterbury, as occupying the See 
from which the Colonial and American Churches 
derive their succession, should be the convener of 
such an Assembly. That it should differ from the 
present Conference in being attended by both Clerical 
and Lay Representatives of the several Churches, 
as consultees and advisers, each Diocese being 
allowed to send, besides its Bishop, a presbyter and 
a lay member of the Church, if they should desire 
to be thus represented; and further, in the proceed- 
ings being more formal and, in part at least, public. 
The question when for the first time, and at what 
periods, this Congress or Council should be called, 
your Committee deem it more respectful to leave for 
the consideration of his Grace the Archbishop of 
Canterbury and of the present Conference. 

G. A. NEW ZEALAND, Chairman. 
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary. 

Reports of Committees, 1867. 117 

B.—Report of the Committee appointed under Resolu- 
tion IX. of the Lambeth Conference, on the Constt- 
tution of a voluntary spiritual Tribunal, to which 
questions of Doctrine may be carried by Appeal 
JSrom the Tribunals for the exercise of discipline in 
each Province of the Colonial Church} 

After full consideration of objections that have 
been urged against the establishment of any such 
Tribunal as that contemplated by this Resolution, 
your Committee are of opinion that these objections 
are not sufficient to outweigh the arguments in its 
favour, and that most of the objections will be found 
inapplicable to the particular form of Tribunal which 
the Committee recommend. 

Your Committee consider that such a Tribunal is 
required in order to prevent the dissatisfaction which 
would arise if important questions were finally decided 
by those Colonial Churches, the circumstances. of 
which render it impossible for them to form a suffi- 
cient Tribunal of last resort. 

It would also tend to secure unity in matters of 
Faith, and uniformity in matters of Discipline, where 
Doctrine may be involved. 

For these reasons your Committee recommend that 
such a Tribunal be established ; and from the desire 

1 Resolution IX.—‘That the Committee appointed by 
Resolution V., with the addition of the names of the Bishops of 
London, St. David’s, and Oxford, and all the Colonial Bishops, 
be instructed to consider the constitution of a voluntary spiri- 
tual Tribunal, to which questions of doctrine may be carried 
by appeal from the Tribunals for the exercise of discipline in 
each Province of the Colonial Church, and that their report be 
forwarded to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, 
who is requested to communicate it to an adjourned meeting 
of this Conference.” 

118 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

expressed by several branches of the Colonial Church, 
that this should be one of the results of this Confer- 
ence, they believe that it will be generally accepted 
by those for whose benefit it is designed. 

At the same time, they are sensible of the great 
difficulty of forming such a Tribunal, and of the 
necessity of proceeding with caution, lest it should 
interfere with the liberties of the Colonial Churches, 
or should have any appearance of collision with the 
Courts established by law, either here or in Her 
Majesty’s foreign possessions. 

Your. Committee now proceed to lay before the 
Conference their conclusions as to the functions and 
constitution of the proposed Tribunal. 

They are of opinion that it should not take cogni- 
zance of any case which shall not have been referred 
to it by some branch of the Anglican Communion 
which has consented to its constitution. Thus it 
would not interfere either with those Churches in 
which provision is made by the State for the exercise 
of discipline, or with the liberty and rights of eccle- 
siastical Provinces. These would be free to accept 
or to decline the appeal thus offered to them, and to 
withdraw afterwards their acceptance of the Tribunal, 
if they should so desire,} 

Your Committee consider that this Tribunal of 
Appeal should take into consideration all the facts of 
the case as sent up to it in writing from the inferior 
Tribunal; that the Appeal, however, should not be 
on the facts, but only on the points of Doctrine and 
Discipline involved in them. 

That during the Appeal the sentence of the Pro- 
vincial Tribunal should continue in force, so far as it 

' The decisions of such a Tribunal would be of the same 
nature as those of “arbitrators, whose jurisdiction rests 
entirely upon the agreement of the parties.” (Judgment of 
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in case of Long wv. 
Bishop of Capetown, τ Moore, P. C. C., N.S. 462.) 

Reports of Committees, 1867. [9 

affects the present exercise of spiritual functions by 
the accused. 

That the judgments of the Tribunal of Appeal 
should be delivered in the form of a decision that the 
teaching or practice of the accused party is (or is 
not) permissible. 

That the Tribunal should use as the standards of 
faith and doctrine by which its decisions shall be 
governed, those which are now in use in the United 
Church of England and Ireland; and that as to all 
matters not defined in such formularies, the judg- 
ments should be framed on any conclusions which 
shall be hereafter agreed to at any Council or 
Congress of the whole Anglican Communion: 
Provided always, that no such conclusion be contra- 
dictory to any now existing standard or formulary of 
the Church of England; and provided further, that 
the Synod of that Province of the Church from which 
the Appeal shall be sent, shall not have refused to - 
accept such conclusion. 

Your Committee further recommend, subject to 
any regulations that may be made at any future 
Conference of the Anglican Communion :— 

That, as it is a Tribunal for decisions in matters 
of faith, Archbishops and Bishops only should be 
judges, his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canter- 
bury being the President. 

That each Province in the Colonial Church should 
have the right of electing two members of the 
Tribunal ; and that all the Dioceses of the Colonial 
Church not associated into Provinces should collec- 
tively have the right of electing two. That each 
Province of the United Church of England and 
Ireland should be requested to elect two members, 
but that the Province of Canterbury should elect 
three, in the event of his Grace the Archbishop not 
acting as President. That the Episcopal Church in 
Scotland should have the right of electing two. And 
(as it appears probable that the Protestant Episcopal 

120 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

Church in the United States would avail itself of 
such a Tribunal) that Church should have the right 
of electing five members. 

In the judgment of the Committee, the Bishops of 
the several Churches should elect those who shall 
represent them on this Tribunal. 

That, so soon after January I, 1869, as any ten 
names shall have been forwarded to the Archbishop 
of Canterbury as having been elected, the Tribunal 
should be deemed to be constituted. 

That of the members thus elected, seven should 
form a quorum for the transaction of business, but a 
smaller number should have power to adjourn from 
time to time. 

That the members of the Tribunal should con- 
tinue in office, unless their seat be vacated by death, 
resignation, or removal. by the electing body; but 
that, in the event of any Bishop of the Colonial or 
American Church notifying to the electing body that 
he is unable or declines to attend at any sitting of 
the Tribunal to which he may be summoned, it 
should be lawful for the body by which he was 
elected to appoint, instead of him, any Bishop of the 
Anglican Communion other than one of those 
already elected. 

That, in the event of the Archbishop of Canter- 
bury for the time being declining or being unable to 
act as President, it should be lawful for his Grace, 
if he should see fit, to nominate any other member 
of the Tribunal to act as President in his room; and 
in the event of no such appointment being made by 
him, that it should be lawful for the Tribunal at 
its first meeting to elect one of its members as 

That the summons for the sitting of the Tribunal 
should be issued within thirty days from the time of 
the notice of Appeal being delivered by the agent of 
the Appellant to the proper officer of the Tribunal. 

That the action of the Tribunal should not be 

Reports of Committees, 1867. 121 

impeded by the absence from it of any of those 
who are at liberty to sit in it, provided there be a 

That, before the assembling of the Tribunal for 
the hearing of an Appeal, the President should 
nominate as Assessors three theologians and three 
persons learned in the law, who should be present 
at the trial, and should answer any questions as to 
theological learning and law put to them by the 
Tribunal through its President in writing, and 
who should be at liberty to tender in writing to the 
Tribunal through its President their opinion upon 
any point of theological learning or law which 
may arise, and that the Tribunal should be bound 
to consider such opinion before coming to its 

That parties before the Tribunal may be repre- 
sented by any counsel they may select, whether 
theologians or persons learned in the law. 

That the rules of procedure of the said Tribunal, 
except as here provided for, should, as far as possible, 
be those of the higher Courts of Law, and that any 
necessary alterations in such rules should be made 
by the Tribunal itself. 

That no sentence should be passed without the 
assent thereto of two-thirds of the Judges present 
during the trial. 

That, at the time of delivering judgment, each 
member of the Tribunal who has been present 
during the trial should give his decision in writing, 
and may read, or cause to be read, openly in Court 
his decision, and the reasons for it; and that the 
judgment of the prescribed majority should be the 
judgment of the Tribunal. 

F. MONTREAL, Chairman. 
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary. 

[22 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

C.—On the Courts of Metropolitans, and the Trial 
of a Lishop or Metropolitan} 

I. Your Committee consider that the constitution 
of the Provincial Tribunal for Appeals from the 
decisions of Diocesan Tribunals should be deter- 
mined, whenever it is not fixed by law, by the 
Synod of the Province; but it is expedient, in their 
judgment, that its rules should be assimilated, as far 
as circumstances will admit, to those of the proposed 
tribunal of Appeal in England. 

II. In the case of charges against a Bishop, they 
suggest the following as general principles :— 

That each Province should determine by rules 
made in its own Synod the offences for which a 
Bishop may be presented for trial, and who should 
be promoters of the charge. 

That the charge should be presented to the 

That it appears doubtful whether a preliminary 
inquiry is expedient, provided that sufficient pre- 
cautions are taken that no frivolous charges should 
be entertained. 

That the Metropolitan should summon to the 
hearing of the cause all the Bishops of the Province 
(except the accused), who should sit as judges, not 
merely as assessors. 

* Resolution X.—“ That the Resolutions submitted to this 
Conference relative to the discipline to be exercised by the 
Metropolitans, the Court of Metropolitans, the scheme for con- 
ducting the Election of Bishops, when not otherwise provided 
for, the declaration of submission to the Regulation of Synods, 
and the question of what Legislation should be proposed for 
the Colonial Churches, be referred to the Committee specified 
in the preceding Resolution.” 

Reports of Committees, 1867. 123 

That no trial should take place, except before 
two-thirds of the Bishops of the Province, provided 
that there be never fewer than three Bishops present, 
including the Metropolitan. 

That if three Bishops of the Province should be 
unable to attend, it should be lawful for the Metro- 
politan to call in one or more Bishops not of the 

That it is desirable that, whenever it may be 
practicable, there should be Assessors, as recom- 
mended by this Committee for the higher Tribunal 
of Appeal. 

That, in case of the non-appearance of the accused 
after sufficient citations, the trial may go forward 
as if he were present, or he may be punished for 
contumacy, according as the Province may prescribe. 

That there should be no sentence except by the 
judgment of two-thirds of the Tribunal, or by three 
judges, whichever should be the greater number ; the 
assent of the Metropolitan not being necessary to 
the sentence. 

That the general rules of procedure should be 
framed by the Synod of the Province; but should 
be, as far as possible, similar to those recommended 
by this Committee for the proposed Tribunal of 

That an appeal to the higher Tribunal recom- 
mended by this Committee should be allowed when 
the case is one of doctrine, or discipline involving 
doctrine, if notice of such appeal be given within 

days from the delivery of sentence ; 
and that, in all cases, proper provision should be 
made for a new trial on sufficient reason being 

That there should be no contract not to appeal to 
Civil Courts ; but that sufficient provision should be 
made by the Declaration of Submission (to be con- 
sidered in another Report) that the sentence of the 
Spiritual Tribunals may be effective. 


124 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

That a Metropolitan should be tried in the same 
manner as any other Bishop—the senior Bishop, in 
that case, acting in the place of the Metropolitan. 

F. MONTREAL, Chairman. 
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary. 

D.—Scheme for conducting the Election of Bishops, 
when not otherwise provided for. ‘ 

Your Committee have to consider the proper 
mode for conducting the election of a Bishop, when- 
ever it is not provided for by an existing law, and 
without reference to any question that might arise 
as to the temporalities connected with the See. 

It is evident that there are two parties whose con- 
current action is necessary in such an appointment 
—viz., the Clergy and Laity of the Diocese, and the 
Bishops οὗ the Province by whom the person elected 
as Bishop is consecrated. 

Your Committee are of opinion that, in accord- 
ance with the ancient usages of the Church, the elec- 
tion as a general rule should be made by the Diocese, 
and that the Bishops of the Province should confirm 
the election. They consider, however, that it is con- 
sistent with this principle that the Diocese should 
nominate two or more persons, of whom the Bishops 
of the Province should select one; or that the 
Diocese should delegate to any person or body the 
power of choosing a Bishop for the vacant See, it 
being understood that the Diocese must accept such 
choice as final. 

The principle of the concurrent action of the two 
parties concerned would also be preserved if the 
Bishops of the Province should nominate two or 

Reports of Committees, 1867. 125 

more persons, from whom the Diocese should elect 

In the election by the Diocese it appears to your 
Committee that the right of selecting the person 
who shall be their Bishop belongs to the Clergy, the 
Laity having the right of accepting or rejecting the 
person so chosen. But it is expedient, in their 
judgment, that the election should always be made 
by the Diocesan Synod, wherever one is established, 
and in accordance with the rules of that Synod. In 
those Dioceses in which there is no Diocesan Synod, 
they recommend that, for the election of a Bishop, 
a Convention should be summoned by the Dean, 
senior Archdeacon, or senior Presbyter of the 
Diocese ; that this Convention should consist of all 
Presbyters and of lay-representatives, who should be 
male communicants of at least twenty-one years of 
age ; that these representatives should be elected by 
each parish or congregation, in such manner as 
should be determined by the convener; that the 
person who should obtain the majority of votes of the 
Clergy, and also of those of the lay-representatives 
present at the Convention, should be accounted to 
be elected to the Bishopric ; that this election should 
not be vitiated by the absence of any of the parties 
summoned, or by the failure of any congregation or 
parish to elect a. lay-representative ; that any ques- 
tion as to the validity of the election to the vacant 
See should be submitted, prior to the Consecration, 
to the Consecrating Bishops, whose decision should 
be final ; and that after the consecration of a Bishop 
no objection should be entertained. 

They further recommend that, where the Diocese 
is included in a Province, the confirmation of an 
election should be by the Metropolitan and a 
majority of the Bishops of the Province ; but where 
the Diocese is extra-Provincial, that the confirmation 
should rest with the Archbishops of Canterbury and 
York and the Bishop of London; that the power of 

126 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

confirmation should be absolute—the Bishops having 
the right to refuse to confirm the election, without 
assigning any reason for their refusal. 

All further rules necessary for conducting the 
election should, in the opinion of your Committee, 
be made by the Synod of the Province. 

F. MONTREAL, Chairman. . 
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary. 

E.—Onx Declaration of Submission to Regulations of 

Your Committee recommend that, in all branches 
of the Church, the government of which is not 
determined by law, a Declaration should be made 
by. those who hold office therein. They consider 
that a Declaration is necessary, in order to define 
the conditions of the consensual compact, and that 
it should be framed so as to secure submission to 
all synodical action in its legitimate sphere, and to 
the decisions of the constituted Tribunals. 

They recommend the following declaration to be 
made, before the Metropolitan, or some person duly 
appointed by him, by all Bishops elect, either before 
their consecration or, if already consecrated, before 
exercising any Episcopal functions in _ their 
diocese :— 

“TA. &., chosen Bishop of the Church and See 
of , do promise that I will teach and 
maintain the doctrine and discipline of the United 
Church of England and Ireland, as acknowledged 
and received by the Province of , and 1 
also do declare that I consent to be bound by all the 
rules and regulations which have heretofore been 

Reports of Committees, 1867. 127 

made or which may from time to time be made, by 
the Synod of the Diocese of , and 
the Provincial Synod of , or either of 
them; and, in consideration of being appointed 
Bishop of the said Church or See of 

hereby undertake immediately to resign the said 
appointment, together with all the rights and emolu- 
ments appertaining thereto, if sentence requiring such 
resignation should at any time be passed upon me, 
after due examination had, by the Tribunal acknow- 
ledged by the Synod of the said Province for the 
trial of a Bishop ; saving all rights of Appeal allowed 
by the said Synod,” 

They recommend that the following Declaration 
be made (in addition to the Declaration required by 
the rulesof that Province or Diocese as to doctrine 
and worship) by persons to be admitted to holy 
orders, and by Clergymen to be admitted to the cure 
of souls, or to any other office of trust in the Church. 

“T, A. B., do declare that I consent to be bound by 
all the rules and regulations which have heretofore 
been made, or which may from time to time be 
made, by the Synod of the Diocese of : 
and the Provincial Synod of , or either of 
them; [and in consideration of being appointed 

, 1 hereby undertake immediately to 
resign the said appointment, together with all the 
rights and emoluments appertaining thereto, if 
sentence requiring such resignation should at any 
time be passed upon me, after due examination had, 
by the Tribunal appointed by the Synods of the 
aforesaid Province and Diocese for the trial of a 
Clergyman ; saving all rights of Appeal allowed by 
the said Synod].” 

(The part in brackets to be omitted when there is 
no appointment to a cure of souls, or office of 

Your Committee consider that it must be left to 
the Province or Diocese to decide whether laymen 

128 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

who are admitted to any office or position of trust 
should be required to sign a Declaration of the same 

G. A. NEW ZEALAND, Chairman. 
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary. 

F.—Ox Provinces and Subordination to 

On this subject your Committee beg to report as 
follows :— 

They are of opinion that the association or fede- 
ration of Dioceses within certain territorial limits, 
commonly called an Ecclesiastical Province, is not 
only in accordance with the ancient laws and usages 
of the Christian Church, but is essential to its 
complete organization. 

Such an association is of the highest advantage for 
united action, for the exercise of discipline, for the 
confirmation of the election of Bishops, and generally 
to enable the Church to adapt its laws to the circum- 
stances of the countries in which it is planted. 

It is expedient, in the judgment of your Com- 
mittee, that these ecclesiastical divisions should, as 
far as possible, follow the civil divisions of these 
countries. | 

Of the Bishops of these Dioceses thus associated, 
one, in conformity with ancient usage, ought to be 
Metropolitan or Primus, the functions and powers 
of the Metropolitan being determined by synodical 
action in the Province, except so far as Metropolitical 
powers are defined by undisputed General Councils 
of the Church. 

It seems to your Committee most in accordance 

‘Reports of Committees, 1867. 129 

with primitive usage that the Metropolitical See 
should be fixed, but they do not deem this to be 
essential. It appears expedient that the Provincial 
Synod should have the power of changing, when 
‘necessary, the site of the Metropolitical See. 

Your Committee do not consider it necessary that 
the election to the Metropolitical See should be 
conducted differently from the election to other 
vacant sees; since the Bishops of the Province 
possess the right of confirming or refusing to confirm 
any election. 

Your Committee strongly recommend that all 
those Dioceses which are not as yet gathered into 
Provinces should, as soon as possible, form part of 
some Provincial organization. The particular mode 
of effecting this in each case must be determined by 
those who are concerned. 

It is sufficient for your Committee to point out 
that the steps to be taken for effecting this change 
are twofold, since the relations of the Dioceses in 
Provincial organisation, when complete, are formed 
on the one hand by the subordination of the Bishops 
of the Province to a Metropolitan, and on the other 
by the association of the Dioceses in Provincial 
action. Any alteration of existing arrangements 
would require, therefore, in the opinion of your 
Committee, the concurrent action of the Diocese 
which is to be gathered into a Province with other 
neighbouring Dioceses, and of his Grace the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury, to whom the Bishops of the 
Dioceses that at present are extra-provincial have 
taken the oath of canonical obedience. In the case 
of the limits of an existing Province being altered, 
the consent of the Synod of that Province would be 
required for the alteration. 

F. MONTREAL, Chairman. 
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary. 

130 Lambeth Conference of 1867, 

G.—Report of the Committee appointed under 
Resolution XI, of the Lambeth Conference! 

Your Committee report that, after full considera- 
tion of the questions referred to them by the 
Conference, they have adopted the following Resolu- 
tions :— 

I. That every branch of the Church is entitled to 
found a Missionary Bishopric. 

II. That it is desirable that each branch of the 
Church should act upon rules agreed upon before- 
hand by the Synod or other Church Council of the 
said branch. 

III. That each Missionary Bishopric should be 
deemed to be attached to one branch of the Church, 
and that all rules for the election of a Missionary 
‘Bishop, and for the formation of a Diocese or 
Dioceses out of the Missionary District, should be 
made by the Synod or other Church Council of such 
branch of the Church. 

IV. That notice of the erection of any Missionary 
Bishopric, and the choice and consecration of the 
Bishop, should be notified to all Archbishops and 
Metropolitans, and all Presiding Bishops, of the 
Anglican Communion, 

V. That in appointing a Missionary Bishop, the 
district within which he is to exercise his Mission 
should be defined as far as possible; and that no 
other Bishop should be sent within the same district, 

Resolution XI.—“ That a Special Committee be 
appointed to consider the Resolutions relative to the notifi- 
cation of proposed Missionary Bishoprics, and the _ sub- 
ordination of Missionaries.” 

Reports of Committees, 1867. 131 

without previous communication with that branch of 
the Church which gave mission for the work. 

VI. That, while peculiar cases may occur in 
Missionary work, owing to difference of race and 
language, in which it may be desirable that more 
than one Bishop should exercise episcopal functions 
within the same district, the Committee consider 
that such cases should be regarded as exceptions, ” 
justified only by special circumstances. 7 

VII. That, with respect to the special case of 
Continental Chaplaincies, the Committee suggest to 
the Conference the consideration of: some ecclesi- 
astical arrangement by which the various congrega- 
tions of the Anglican Communion may be under 
one authority, whether of the English or American 

VIII. That the conditions on which a Missionary 
Bishopric should be brought within a Provincial 
organisation should be :— 

1. The request of the Missionary Bishop, ad- 
dressed both to the Church from which he received 
mission and to the Province which he wishes to join. 

2. The consent of the Church from which he 
received mission, that consent being given by the 
Metropolitan or Presiding Bishop. 

3. The consent of the Province he wishes to 
join, that consent being given by the Provincial 

IX. That the status, jurisdiction, and designation 
of the Bishop thus received into a system of Pro- 
vincial organisation should be determined by the 
Synod of the Province to which his Bishopric shall 
be then attached. 

X. That, as a general rule, it is expedient that 
such Missionary Bishopric should be attached to 
the nearest Province; but that in certain cases it 
may be necessary that some more remote Province 
should be selected. 

Bishop Tozer’s Mission is a case to which the 

132 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

Committee desire to draw the attention of the Con- 
ference, as being one in which, for the present, 
Provincial organization would seem to be imprac- 
ticable, from the isolation of the district in which 
Bishop Tozer exercises his episcopal functions, and 
its remoteness from the Province of South Africa. 

XI. That Missionary Bishops and their Clergy 
should be bound generally to the Canons of Doctrine 
and Discipline of the Church from which their 
mission is derived, or to which they may have 
been united, and that all alterations in matters of 
discipline be communicated toe the authorities of 
that Church. 

XII. That when a Missionary Church shall be 
received into the organisation of a Provincial Synod, 
the said Church should be bound by the acts-of that 
body; but that, in order to effect this, the Missionary 
Church should be granted a power of representation, 
or of vote by proxy, in such Synod. 

XIII. That, as a general rule, in conformity with 
Church order, ‘all Missionaries and Chaplains residing 
or engaged in the exercise of ministerial duty within 
the Diocese or District of a Colonial or Missionary 
Bishop, should be licensed by, and be subject to the 
authority of, the said Bishop. 

XIV. That every Clergyman removing from one 
Colonial or Missionary Diocese or District into 
another Diocese ought to carry with him Letters 
Testimonial from the Colonial or Missionary Bishop 
whose Diocese or District he is leaving. 

XV. That no person admitted to Holy Orders by 
the Bishop of any Diocese-in England or Ireland, 
who shall afterwards have been serving under the 
jurisdiction of any Scottish, Colonial, or Foreign 
Bishop, should be received into any of the Home 
Dioceses, without: producing letters Dimissory or 
Commendatory from the Scottish, Colonial, or Foreign 
Bishop in whose Diocese he has been serving. 

XVI. The attention of this Committee has been 

Reports of Committees, 1867. 133 

called to the clause in the Paper of Arrangements. 
for the Conference, headed “ Subordination of Mis- 
sionaries.” —The Committee have failed to understand 
what is meant by the words “ instructions from those 
in authority at home,” but they can recommend no 
scheme which interferes with the canonical relation 
which subsists between a Bishop and his clergy. 

W. J. GIBRALTAR, Chairman. 

Missionary Bishop, Secretary. 

H.—Report of the Committee appointed under 
Resolution VI, of the Lambeth Conference. 

By the Resolution of the Lambeth Conference 
two questions were referred to the Committee :— 

I. How the Church may be delivered from a con- 
tinuance of the scandal now existing in Natal? 

II. How the true faith may be maintained ? 

I. On the first question, the Committee recom- 
mend that an Address be made to the Colonial 

1 Resolution VI.—‘ That, in the judgment of the Bishops 
now assembled, the whole Anglican Communion is deeply 
injured by the present condition of the Church in Natal: and 
that a Committee be now appointed at this General Meeting 
to report on the best mode by which the Church may be 
delivered from a continuance of this scandal, and the true 
faith maintained. That such Report shall be forwarded to his 
Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, with the request 
that he will be pleased to transmit the same to all the Bishops 
of the Anglican Communion, and to ask for their judgment 
thereupon.” . 

134 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

Bishoprics Council, calling their attention to the 
fact that they are paying an annual stipend to a 
Bishop lying under the imputation of heretical 
teaching, and praying them to take the best legal 
opinion as to there being any, and if so what, 
mode of laying these allegations before some com- 
petent court, and if any mode be pointed out, then to 
proceed accordingly for the removal of this scandal. 

The Committee also recommend that the Address 
to the Colonial Bishoprics Council be prefaced with 
the following statement :— 

“That, whilst we accept the spiritual validity of 
the sentence of deposition pronounced by the Metro- 
politan and Bishops of the South African Church . 
upon Dr. Colenso, we consider it of the utmost 
moment for removing the existing scandal from the 
English Communion that there should be pronounced 
by some competent English court such a legal sen- 
tence on the errors of the said Dr. Colenso as would 
warrant the Colonial Bishoprics Council in ceasing 
to pay his stipend, and would justify an appeal to 
the Crown to cancel his Letters Patent.” 

II. On the second question : 

“How the true faith may be maintained in Natal?” 

The Committee submit the following Report :— 

That they did not consider themselves instructed 
by the Conference, and therefore did not consider 
themselves competent, to inquire into the whole 
case; but that their conclusions are based upon the 
following facts :— 

1. That in the year 1863, forty-one Bishops con- 
curred in an Address to Bishop Colenso, urging him 
to resign his Bishopric. 

2. That in the year 1863, some of the publications 
of Dr. Colenso, viz.—‘ The Pentateuch and Book of 
Joshua critically examined,” Parts I. and II., were 
condemned by the Convocation of the Province of 

3. That the Bishop of Capetown, by virtue of his 

Reports of Committees, 1867. 135 

Letters Patent as Metropolitan, might have visited 
Dr. Colenso with summary jurisdiction, and might 
have taken out of his hands the management of the 
Diocese of Natal. 

4. That the Bishop of Capetown, instead of pro- 
ceeding summarily, instituted judicial proceedings, 
having reason to believe himself to be competent 
to do so. 

That he summoned Dr. Colenso before himself 
and suffragans. | 

That Dr. Colenso appeared by his proctor. 

That his defence was heard and judged to be 
insufficient to purge him from the heresy. 

That, after sentence was pronounced, Dr. Colenso 
was offered an appeal to the Archbishop of Canter- 
bury, as provided in the Metropolitan’s Letters 

5. That this Act of the African Church was 

By the Convocation of Canterbury ; 

By the Convocation of York ; 

By the General Convention of the Episcopal 
Church in the United States, in 1865 ; 

By the Episcopal Synod of the Church in Scotland; 

By the Provincial Synod of the Church in Canada, 
in the year 1865 ; 

And, finally, the spiritual validity of the sentence 
of. deposition was accepted by f/ty-szx Bishops on 
the occasion of the Lambeth Conference. 

Judging, therefore, that the See is spiritually 
vacant; and learning, by the evidence brought 
before them, that there are many members of the 
Church who are unable to accept the ministrations 
of Dr. Colenso, the Committee deem it to be the 
duty of the Metropolitan and other Bishops of South 
Africa to proceed, upon the election of the Clergy 
and Laity in Natal, to consecate one to discharge 
those spiritual functions of which these members of 
the Church are now in want. — 

136 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

In forwarding their Report to his Grace the Lord 
Archbishop of Canterbury, as instructed by the Re- 
solution of the Conference, the Committee request 
his Grace to communicate the same to the adjourned 
meeting of the Conference, to be holden at Lambeth 
on the tenth day of the present month. 

December 9th, 1867. Convener. 

J.—Form of Letters Dimissory for the Clergy. 

To the Right Reverend the Bishops and Reverend 
the Clergy, and to the faithful in Christ of the 
Diocese of A. We, B, by Divine permission Bishop 
of C, send greeting in the Lord. 

We commend to your brotherly kindness by these 
our letters, D, E, Priest (or Deacon) of our Diocese, 
beseeching you to receive him in the Lord as a 
brother sound in the Faith, of a well-ordered and 
Religious Life, and worthy of all Christian Fellow- 
ship, and to render him any assistance of which he 
may stand in need; and so we bid you farewell in 
Christ our Lord 

Witness our hand. 

A, Bishop. 
B, Secretary: 

No. XIII. (See page 19.) 

Resolutions of the Adjourned Conference, Dec. 10, 1867. 

Resolution I—* That this adjourned meeting of 
the Conference receives the Report (No. I.) of the 
Committee now presented, and directs the publica- 

Adjourned Conference, Dec. 10, 1867. 137 

tion thereof, commending it to the careful conside- 
ration of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion, 
as containing the result of the deliberations of that 
Committee; and returns the members of the same 
its thanks for the care with which they have con- 
sidered the various important: questions referred to 
them.” i 

(The same Resolution was passed with reference 
to Reports ᾿ς III, 1V., V., VI., VIL) 

Resolution II.—‘ That the Report (No. VIII.) 
of the Committee appointed under Resolution VI, 
laid before this meeting by his Grace the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury be received and printed ; that 
the thanks of this Meeting be given to the Com- 
mittee for their labours; and that his Grace be re- 
quested to communicate the Report to the Council 
of the Colonial Bishoprics Fund.” 

Resolution III.—* That his Grace be requested, if 
applied to by the House of Bishops in the Episcopal 
Church in the United States of America, to allow a 
copy of the Records of the Conference to be made 
for them, and to be lodged in the hands of such 
officer as shall be designated by the House of Bishops 
to receive it, for reference by Bishops only, but not 
for publication.” 

Resolution IV.“ That his Grace the Archbishop 
of Canterbury be requested to convey to the Church 
in Russia an expression of the sympathy of the 
Anglican Communion with that Church, in the loss 
which it has sustained by the death of his Eminence 
Philarete, the venerable Metropolitan of Moscow.” 

Resolution V.-“ That the thanks of this Confer- 
ence be given to the Bishop of Grahamstown for the 
valuable services which he has rendered as Secretary 
to many of the Committees appointed by the Con- 

Resolution VI.—* That the thanks of this Confer- 
ence be given to Philip Wright, Esq.,and to Isambard 
Brunel, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, for their aid as 


138 Lambeth Conference of 1867. 

Assistant Secretaries to the Committees ; and espe- 
cially to the latter for his valuable assistance in all 
matters that required legal advice.” 

Resolution VII.—*‘ That we cannot close this 
Conference without conveying our hearty thanks to 
his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, both for 
convening this meeting, and for the mode in which 
he has presided over its deliberations.” 

Besides the preceding Resolutions,— 

The President reported that he had been authorised 
to annex the following signatures to the Encyclical 
Letter :— 






2. The following Bishops were appointed as a Sub- 
Committee, for the purpose of drawing up a Bill, in 
accordance with a Report submitted by the Com- 
mittee appointed under Resolution IX. of the previous 
meeting :— 


3. His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury laid 
on the table a form of Letters Dimissory,! which he 
had prepared, in accordance with Resolution II. of 
the last session of the Lambeth Conference. 

2 J. page 136. 

Canadian and West Indian Addresses. 139 

4. The Bishop of Illinois, at the request of the 
Conference, stated that the Meeting of the Triennial 
General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal 
Church in the United States would be held onthe 
first Wednesday of October next, in the City of New 
York ; and, in behalf of the Church in the United 
States, offered an affectionate invitation to the 
Bishops of the Conference to be present on that 
occasion ; and also expressed the hope that the dif- 
ferent branches of the Anglican Communion would 
depute one or more Bishops as Representatives of 
the Mother and Colonial Churches, to be present on 
that occasion, assuring all that might accept this 
invitation of cordial welcome and affectionate brother- 

5. At the request of the Conference, the Bishop 
of Lichfield (Elect) undertook the office of Corre- 
sponding Secretary for the Bishops of the Anglican 

His Grace the President then pronounced the 
Benediction, and the Conference was closed. 

No. XIV. (See page 21.) 

Addresses from the Canadian and West Indian Houses 
of bishops. 1872 and 1873. 

I. To his Grace the President and their Lordships 
the Bishops of the Upper House of Convocation 
of Canterbury— 

We, the Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of 
Canada, availing ourselves of the opportunity afforded 
by the meeting of a special Provincial Synod, desire 
that the following Address, touching the Lambeth 

K 2 

140 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

Conference, be forwarded to his Grace, the President, 
and to the Prolocutor of the Lower House of Con- 
vocation of the Province of Canterbury. 

We, the Bishops aforesaid, encouraged by the 
successful results of the Address presented to his 
Grace the late Archbishop of Canterbury, by the 
Provincial Synod of Canada, whereby the Lambeth 
Conference was convened, humbly and earnestly 
petition that the Convocation of Canterbury will take 
such action as may seem most expedient to unite 
with us in requesting the Archbishop of Canterbury 
to summon a second meeting of the Conference. 

We are persuaded that such meeting will be most 
efficacious in uniting the scattered branches of the 
Anglican Communion, and in promoting the exten- 
sion of the Kingdom of Christ throughout the world; 
and we therefore pray that it may be again convened 
at the earliest day that may suit the convenience of 
the Archbishop of Canterbury. 

A. MONTREAL (Metropolitan). 




Montreal, Dec. 13, 1872. 

2. “The West Indian Bishops [assembled at 
Georgetown, Demerara, in 1873] join in the request 
lately made to the Archbishop of Canterbury by the 
Bishops of the Canadian Province, that he would 
summon another meeting of the Bishops of the 
Anglican Communion throughout the world at as 
early a date as may seem to his Grace practicable 
and expedient.” 

Correspondence with American Church. 141 

No. XV. (See page 21.) 

Correspondence between Bishops of the Protestant 
Episcopal Church in the United States and the 
Archbishop of Canterbury. 1874 and 1875. 

1. The Archbishop of Canterbury to Bishop Kerfoot, 
of Pittsburgh. 


Before you leave England, I wish to say 
to you that the subject of another gathering of 
Bishops of our Communion at Lambeth has been 
much talked of lately. If the House of Bishops of 
your Church were to express their wishes on this 
subject, it might help me in bringing the matter 
before my brethren of this country when we meet in 
January of next year. 

Trusting that God will bless you in your journey 
and on your return to your work, 

I am, your faithful Brother, 

2. The Bishop of Pittsburgh to the Archbishop of 

HousE ΟΕ BisHors, New York, δου. 3, 1874. 
My DEAR Lorp, 

I had the pleasure not long since of 
writing to you from this House, to say that the 
request to your Grace to invite another Lambeth 
Conference had been signed by forty-three of the 

[42 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

forty-six Bishops in attendance. I then said that I 
would write again fully when the engagements of 
the General Convention allowed me to do so. 

The matter was introduced by me into this House 
early in our session, so that the Lord Bishop of 
Lichfield, who was with us for the first week of the 
Convention, might speak to the Bishops on the 
subject. He did this with great discretion and effect 
in our House, and also in the House of Deputies. 
While the Bishops generally were very favourably 
disposed towards the proposal (and your Grace’s note 
to me of August 25th very much promoted this 
inclination), some of them wished that any action of 
the Bishops should be preceded by some expression 
from the clerical and lay deputies that would prevent 
any thought that the Bishops were acting for them- 
selves alone, and not also for and with the clergy 
ain, laity. 0.5/3 It was deemed by all the Bishops 
to be sufficient, and for several reasons best, that we 
should express our wish and convey our request to 
your Grace in the form in which it has by this 
time reached you through the Bishop of Lichfield. 
The Bishop of New York and myself prepared the 
paper, and received the signatures of the Bishops 
individually. As some of the signatures may not be 
readily legible, I enclose a printed list of the names 
of the signers. 

It clearly appeared in the consultations of the 
deputies, and even of the Bishops, that there were 
not a few misconceptions about the Conference of 
1867. This, 1 think, was due, in large measure, to 
the misrepresentation of its character and manage- 
ment in the memoir of the late Bishop Hopkins... . 
Bishop Hopkins himself would not, I am sure, have 
approved of the sketch of the Lambeth Conference 
given by his biographer. But its effects were seen, 
and I hope counteracted, in the discussions. 

In the consultation of the Bishops, the wish was 
several times expressed that the arrangements for a 

Correspondence with American Church. 143 

Conference in 1876 should be such as to manifest 
that the variety of the topics admitted, and the time 
allowed, should be such as would seem to justify a 
Convocation of our Bishops from all over the world. 
There was no wish to annex terms or conditions to 
our request to your Grace. The suggestions already 
made by the Canadian Synod (whose action on this 
subject was recited in our House of Bishops) covers 
most or all of this ground.! As our consultations 
went on, it seemed to be devolved on me, by general 
consent, to make to you this informal communication 
about such wishes. Two or three Bishops gave them 
to me in writing ; some others in unwritten words. 
The thoughts were that the Bishops attending the 
Conference might propose for discussion such ques- 
tions as each one should deem right; and that the 
sessions should be continued long enough to allow 
of the needful Conferences. Those of us who were 
at Lambeth seven years ago knew quite well that 
such were the real character and spirit of that Con- 
ference; but that it being then an enterprise and 
experiment at once novel and anxious, precautions 
were rightly taken and limitations wisely observed 
that persons at a distance could not fully or fairly 
comprehend. The invitation was even then given 
in advance to the Bishops to suggest topics ; and 
many of us did this, and I believe every such topic 
was introduced. 

I made such answers to the inquiries of some of my 
brethren, adding that, of course, as then, so whenever 
we should meet again, no topic should be introduced 
which must elicit discussions on the State relations 
of the Church of England. All the Bishops here at 
once recognise this as the right rule. I said this was 
the only real limitation I witnessed seven years ago. 
I ventured to anticipate that on this point every 
reasonable wish would be satisfied in the future 

* See below, page 148. 

144 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

In thus writing at, I hope, not a needless length to 
your Grace, I think that I quite fulfil the promises 
made to some of my American brethren, who united 
heartily in the request sent to you, and I hope that I 
also convey such intimations as will entirely meet 
your own views in your anticipation of any such 
Conference. I may also add that the careful con- 
sideration given to the whole scheme here of late 
only confirms our convictions of the wisdom and 
usefulness of the renewal of the Conference of 1867. 
I am, my dear Lord Archbishop, your Grace’s very 
faithful and affectionate brother. 

Bishop of Pittsburgh. 

3. The following zs the formal Resolution referred to 
in the foregoing letter. 

The undersigned Bishops of the Protestant Epis- 
copal Church in the United States, having had the 
pleasure of listening to the statements of the Right 
Reverend the Lord Bishop of Lichfield, of the Right 
Reverend the Lord Bishop of Montreal and Metro- 
politan, of the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of 
Kingston, Jamaica, and of the Right Reverend the 
Lord Bishop of Quebec in reference to the benefits 
to the whole Anglican Communion to be derived 
from the holding of another Conference of the 
Bishops thereof, do most cordially express in their 
individual capacity their interest in the subject, and 
their hope that his Grace the Archbishop of Canter- 
bury will find it consistent with his views of duty to 
take steps towards the assembling of such a Con- 

[The signatures of forty-two Bishops, including 
the presiding Bishop, are appended. ] 

Correspondence with American Church. 145 

4. The Archbishop of Canterbury to the Bishop of 

April 27, 1875. 


As I promised, I brought the question of a second 
Lambeth Conference and your kind letter before the 
Bishops of the Southern Province, who met lately in 

The holding of such a Conference in the autumn 
of next year is rendered impossible, if not by other 
causes, by the fact that I find that 1876 is the year 
in which I must (D.v.) hold my visitation in the 
autumn, and deliver my charge, and you will under- 
stand the impossibility of my undertaking at that 
time the additional work necessarily involved on so 
important an occasion as the reassembling of the 
Lambeth Conference. 

We cannot, therefore, look forward to the Con- 
ference taking place earlier than 1877, which will be 
ten years from the time of the first meeting. But, 
as we know that your Convention meets in the 
autumn of that year, it appears to us that the 
Lambeth Conference might well be in the spring 
of 1877, thus leaving time for our American brethren 
to return home before this Convention. 

I think I ought to add that there was a general 
impression that, before steps were taken for gathering 
Bishops from all parts of the world, we ought dis- 
tinctly to understand what the subjects are on which 
discussion is desirable. There was a general feeling 
that matters of doctrine which are already settled by 
our formularies could not be re-opened, and matters 
of discipline must be left to the authorities of each 
separate Church. There remains, therefore, only 
such general questions as relate to the intercourse 

146 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

of the various branches of our Church, and that 
brotherly conference which was on former occasions 
found so valuable. 

I write this private letter, as I think you may wish 
to know the feelings of the English Bishops on this 
important subject with as little delay as possible, and 
I hope before long to be able to return a formal 
answer to the document signed by the Bishops of 
the American Episcopal Church. 

Believe me to be, my dear Bishop, 
Very sincerely yours, 


5. Zo the Right Rev. the Bishops of the Protestant 
Episcopal Church of the United States of 


June 7, 1875. 

I have laid before my brethren of the Province of 
Canterbury your letter on the subject of holding a 
second Lambeth Conference, and I have had com- 
munication on the same subject with the Archbishop 
of York, as representing the Bishops of the Northern 

We entertain a grateful sense of the advantages of 
that brotherly intercourse which the last Lambeth 
Conference tended to encourage, and we should look 
forward with much pleasure to another meeting of 
the same kind. 

I am, however, instructed by my brethren to bring 
before you the two following considerations, re- 
specting which I should be glad to have your 
opinion before taking any further steps in this 
matter. : 

1. It seems to my brethren and myself that such a 

Correspondence with American Church. 147 

Conference could not with advantage be held till the 
tenth year after the last meeting. I am aware that 
this would bring us to the year 1877, in which, as I 
understand, your general convention holds its triennial 
meeting ; but the autumn of 1876, which has been 
mentioned by the Bishop of Lichfield as a suitable 
time, will, so far as I can foresee, be entirely occupied 
by my visitation of the Archdiocese of Canterbury, 
and it is the opinion of those whom I have consulted 
that the most convenient time would be the summer 
of 1877, say, in the month of July, which time would 
enable our brethren of the United States to return 
home for the meeting of their own Convention. 

2. I have also been requested to bring before you 
the following point. You will at once see that I 
ought not to take the step of inviting so large a body 
of Bishops to leave the scene of their labours in their 
distant Dioceses without being able to state to them 
somewhat explicitly what the practical results are 
which are expected to be derived from the Con- 

It appears to us that, respecting matters of doctrine, 
no change can be proposed or discussed, and that no 
authoritative explanation of doctrine ought to be 
taken in hand. Each Church is naturally guided in 
the interpretation of its formularies by its recognised 
authorities. Again, respecting matters of discipline, 
each Church has its own appointed Courts for the 
administration of its ecclesiastical law, with which, 
of course, such a meeting of Bishops as is proposed 
claims no power to interfere. The present state of 
the Christian Church makes men more than usually 
sensitive as to any appearance even of a claim on the 
part of any one branch of the Church to interfere 
with the decisions or administrations of another. 
Each is considered qualified to regulate its own 
separate affairs, while all are united in the mainte- 
nance of the one faith. Therefore, if the Conference 
meets, it will be necessary to exclude all questions 

148 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

which might happen to trench on the complete 
independence of the several branches of the Church. 

The propriety of the Bishops meeting in Con- 
ference must depend, I conceive, upon this—whether 
there appear a sufficient number of subjects relating 
to the brotherly intercourse of the various Branches 
of the Anglican Communion, on which a conference 
of the chief Ministers of the several Churches would 
be likely to throw light. 

I should be greatly obliged for any communica- 
tion which you may be disposed to send to me, 
during the next six months, as to your views on the 
general desirableness of our meeting under such 
circumstances as I have described. I will take care, 
before the close of the present year, to lay before my 
brethren in England any statement I receive as to 
the particular questions which you think it desirable 
for the Bishops of the Anglican Communion to 

This would enable us to come to a decision re- 
specting the Conference, and make any arrangements 
that may be required. 

I remain, 
Your faithful brother and servant in Christ, 


No. XVI. (See page 22.) 
Memorandum of the Canadian House of Bishops. 1874. 

Suggestions of the Canadian House of Bishops 
made to the Bishop of Lichfield concerning the 
Lambeth Conference. 

1. As to the period of its meeting— 

We would suggest that 1876 would be a period 
very convenient and welcome to the Church in 

Canadian Bishops Memorandum. 149 

2. As to the duration of the Conference— 

We are of opinion that there should be a con- 
tinuous Session of one month, four days in each 
week being days of session ; or, 

That there should be at least two weeks of Session, 
with an interval between the first and last week. 

3. As to the matter to be discussed— 

We feel that it is most desirable that the Reports 
of Committees laid before the Conference of 1867 
should be carefully considered, with the exception of 
Report No. 8. 

4. We think that it would be very convenient 
to the Bishops invited to the Congress that an 
opportunity should be given them of suggesting 
beforehand any subject which they may wish: to 
have considered. 

5. We feel that, if his Grace should be pleased to 
grant the Bishops an opportunity of assembling 
in Conference, it would be extremely desirable that 
his decision on the above matters should be embodied 
in the Circular of Invitation. 

Signed, on behalf of the Bishops of the Province 
of Canada, 

A. MONTREAL, Metropolitan. 

No. XVII. (See page 24. 

Action of the Convocations of Canterbury and York 

with reference to the proposed Second Lambeth 

The Memorials from the Canadian and West 
Indian Bishops (quoted above, No. XVI, page 148), 
were on April 29, 1874, referred by the Upper House 

150 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

of the Convocation of Canterbury to a Joint Com- 
mittee of fifteen members, who, on July 10, 1874, 
presented a report in the shape of the following four 
Resolutions :— 

1.. “ That the relation of his Grace the Lord Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury to the other Bishops of the 
Anglican Communion be that of Primate among 
Archbishops, Primates, Metropolitans, and Bishops.” 

2. “That in accordance with the Memorial of the 
Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Canada, 
and the resolution of the Bishops of the West Indian 
Dioceses, his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canter- 
bury be requested to convene a General Conference 
of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion to carry 
on the work begun by the Lambeth Conference in 

3. “ That the Reports of Committees presented at 
the adjourned Session of the Lambeth Conference in 
1867, but not adopted or even discussed, be taken 
into consideration at the Second Conference.” 

4. “That the Committee recommend that his 
Grace be respectfully requested to convene the 
second meeting of the Lambeth Conference for the 
year 1876.” 

“ G. A. LICHFIELD, Chairman.” 

The Report was received by the Upper House, 
and communicated to the Lower House, July Io, 
1874.— (See Chronicle of Convocation, pp. 437-439.) 

The Upper House of Canterbury Convocation had 
also resolved, on April 29, 1874, to invite an expres- 
sion of opinion from the Convocation of York, and 
that Convocation, on February 26, 1875, passed the 
following resolution :— 

“That this Synod, in reply to a communication 
from the Province of Canterbury, asking for an 
expression of opinion upon three resolutions respect- 
ing certain memorials received from the Ecclesias- 

Archbishop Ταῖς Letter of Inquiry, 1876. 151 

tical Province of Canada, and from the Bishops of 
the West Indian Dioceses, prays that his Grace the 
President will convey to his Grace the Archbishop 
of Canterbury the wish of this Synod that all 
necessary steps may be taken for the assembling of 
a second Conference at Lambeth, but would desire 
to leave all other questions involved in these resolu- 
tions to be decided as may seem best to the Arch- 
bishops and the bench of Bishops.” 

No. XVIII. (See page 24.) 

Circular Letter of Inquiry addressed by the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury to all the Anglican Bishops, 
March 28, 1876. 

LAMBETH PALACE, J/arch 28, 1876. 


A wish has been expressed by many Bishops of 
the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United 
States of America, by the Bishops of the Canadian 
Dominion, and by the West Indian Bishops, that a 
second Conference of our brethren should be held at 

Before I decide upon the important step of inviting 
the Bishops of our Communion throughout the world 
to assemble at Lambeth, I have thought it right, 
after consultation with the Bishops of England, to 
give all our brethren an opportunity of expressing 
their opinion upon the expediency of convening such 
a Conference at this time, and upon the choice of 
the subjects which ought to engage its attention, if 
it be convened, 

152 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

I therefore beg leave to intimate to you our readi- 
ness to hold a Conference at Lambeth in or about 
the month of July, 1878, if it shall seem expedient, 
after the opinions of all our brethren have been 
ascertained ; and I need scarcely assure you that 
your advice is earnestly desired, and will be respect- 
fully considered. May I ask, for our guidance, 
whether you are willing, and are likely to be able, to 
attend the Conference yourself ? } 

Those who were present at Lambeth in 1867 
thankfully acknowledged that, through the blessing 
of Almighty God, the Bishops of the various branches 
of the Anglican Communion were drawn together 
in closer bonds of brotherly love and sympathy. 

The help and comfort which are due from the 
branches of Christ’s Church to each other are more 
readily rendered, and more fully each is made ac- 
quainted with the wants of the rest. In this time of 
religious activity and increased intercourse between 
all parts of the world, there is greater need than ever 
of mutual counsel amongst the Bishops of our 
widely-extended Communion. 

The Bishops of England, therefore, earnestly ask 
you to join with them in prayer that we may all be 
guided to a wise decision on this important matter, 
and if it should be resolved to hold the Conference, 
that its deliberations may issue in greater peace, and 
strength, and energy to the whole Church of Christ. 

Anxiously awaiting your answer, 
I remain, 
Your faithful Brother and Servant in Christ, 


The Right Reverend the Bishop of ..... 

Archbishop Tait’s Letter of Invitation, 1877. 153 

“ Covering letter” to the Metropolitans and Presiding 

LAMBETH PALACE, S.E., Jarch 28, 1876. 

After consultation with my Brethren the Bishops 
of England, including the Archbishop of York, I beg 
leave to address you as of : 
and request you to circulate among the Bishops of 
your branch of the Church the enclosed documents, 
having reference to a second Lambeth Conference. 

I shall feel obliged by your favouring us at your 
earliest convenience with your own views on the 
questions now submitted to your consideration. 

I remain, your faithful brother and servant in 


No. XIX. (See page 25.) 
Letter of Invitation to the Conference cf 1878. 

LAMBETH PALACE, F#ly 10, 1877. 


It is proposed to hold a Conference of Bishops of 
the Anglican Communion at this place, beginning 
on Tuesday, the second day of July, Eighteen 
hundred and Seventy-eight. 

The Conference, it is proposed, shall extend over 
four weeks ; the first week of four Sessions to be 
devoted to discussions, in Conference, of the subjects 
submitted for deliberation; the second and third 
weeks to the consideration of these subjects in Com- 
mittees ; andthe fourth week to final discussions in 
Conference, and to the close of the Meeting. 

' @.g., Metropolitan of Canada. 

154 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

The subjects selected for discussion are the fol- 
lowing :— | 

1. The best mode of maintaining Union among the 
various Churches of the Anglican Communion. 

2. Voluntary Boards of Arbitration for Churches 
to which such an arrangement may be applicable. 

3. The relations to each other of Missionary 
Bishops and of Missionaries in various branches of 
the Anglican Communion acting in the same country. 

4. The position of Anglican. Chaplains and Chap- 
laincies on the Continent of Europe and elsewhere. 

5. Modern forms of infidelity, and the best means 
of dealing with them. 

6. The condition, progress, and needs of the 
various Churches of the Anglican Communion. 

I shall feel greatly obliged if, at your early con- 
venience, you will inform me whether we may have 
the pleasure of expecting your presence at the Con- 

Iam, Right Reverend and dear brother, yours 
faithfully in Christ, 


No. XX. (See page 29). 

Sermon preached by the Archbishop of York, in 
Lambeth Palace Chapel, on Tuesday, July 2nd, 

“But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the 
face, because he was to be blamed.”—Ge/. ii. 11. 

This is the first rupture amongst those who’ were 
to spread the knowledge of Christ throughout the 
world. An Apostle withstood an Apostle to the 

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 155 

face, because he was to be blamed! We all re- 
member the facts. No direction had been left by the 
Lord as to the treatment of the Gentiles that should 
believe. Did their road to the Kingdom of Heaven 
conduct through the Temple? Were the Gentiles 
that believed to observe the law of Moses? If not, 
what advantage had the chosen people over the scum 
and off-scouring of the earth ? 

These questions, of vital moment, and now im- 
periously demanding a solution, were left open by the 
divine Founder of the Church; they were to be 
decided by the light of the Holy Spirit, working in 
the Church itself. Decided they were, and set at 
rest for ever. But the process of doubt and struggle 
may be to us the most seasonable subject of reflec- 
tion. May that Holy Spirit, who has taught and 
guided the Church from the first, be with us all this 
day, meditating on this significant place of Holy 
Writ. Amen. 

It was long before the Church would accept the 
plain meaning of this passage. Was it possible, then, 
that two such lights of the earth could fall apart in 
strife, and this about a matter of faith? What would 
the outside world say against the truth of God—nay, 
‘ what a@zd it say before the spectacle of such a strife ? 
If the founders of the Church can thus diverge, what 
is the doctrine of the Church worth?? Thus they 
mocked ; and the Fathers, hard pressed, adopted the 
theory of Origen, that this dispute was simulated, 
was nothing but a scene got up between the two 
Apostles, who had made up their minds in concert, 
about the position of the Gentiles, in order that a 
strong lesson of submission might be taught to the 
Judaising Christians in the person of Peter himself. 
It is strange that such a theory, in which an accusa- 

1 Rather “he was condemned ;” whether this means “ con- 
demned by the very facts,” or “ condemned by some assembly 
or body of Christians” does not appear ; the former is probable. 

3 Hieron., ‘‘ Ep. ad Galat.,” Pref. ) 


156 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

tion of base deceit on the part of both is substituted 
for one of timidity on the part of one, should have 
been able to attract even Jerome; against whom 
Augustine rose up, and following the precedent, 
“withstood him to the face” for attributing to these 
Apostles a trick which would shake our faith in the 
Holy Scriptures themselves ; since these hold up the 
quarrel as a reality, and not as a piece of acting. 

It was indeed a quarrel. On some visit to 
Antioch, not, as I venture to think, after, but before, 
the decision of the Council of Jerusalem on this ques- 
tion, St. Peter, by eating and drinking in communion 
with the Gentiles recognised their conversion and 
their position as members of the Church. But then 
came some from Jerusalem, where the feeling was 
strong that the law should be observed. A fresh 
dispute sprang up. Peter desired to avoid offence to 
his own people, from Jerusalem, so he withdrew from 
the Gentile converts. It was a heavy censure; it 
wasa badexample. Barnabas himself was entangled 
in this “hypocrisy.” A great crisis of the Church 
had come, and such a desertion cut St. Paul to the 
heart. His anger was great. The wrong had been 
public, and so should the rebuke be. It does not 
appear that he reasoned with Peter in private. On 
some public occasion he withstood and rebuked him. 
Not the law, but Christ,could save. Why should Peter, 
who had once set himself free from the law, bind its 
chains again upon other people? If salvation was to 
be by the law, then Christ was dead in vain. We 
have no report of this dispute ; but, whatever may 
be thought of the method of treatment, it is likely 
that the course taken by St. Paul did much to clear 
the ground in that momentous controversy. Bar- 
nabas, it is plain, must have retracted; and as for 
Peter, if I am right in supposing that this event pre- 
ceded the Council at Jerusalem, we know how he 
regarded the Gentiles. God “ put no difference be- 
tween us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.” 

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 157 

The grace of God, which raises men’s hearts by 
degrees into conformity with the Divine image, does 
not suddenly destroy the old nature. St. Peter is 
still the same impulsive man who could now confess 
the Christ, and now, when troubles came, deny Him ; 
who could follow him bravely into danger, yet be 
overcome by the gossiping remark of a girl that met 
him by chance. We must not try this case by the 
standard of Anglo-Saxon consistency ; we sometimes 
perhaps run the risk of purchasing too dearly that 
favourite virtue, at the price of zeal and ardour. We 
are not naturally indulgent towards that impulsive 
nature, which the great Apostle, more Jewish in this 
than the Jews, derived from his race. Anxious to 
please, and to be in sympathy with those about him, 
he rejoiced at first in the Gentile freedom; until 
those came about him who were full of prejudice 
for their venerable law, its severe conditions of com- 
munion, its austere separation. Let us neither praise 
nor blame ; let us only say, Grace has not yet wrought 
her perfect work in this Apostle’s heart. 

Nor has the other great Apostle yet learned all 
that the school of grace can teach him. Face to 
face, before the whole Church, he rebukes and 
humbles a brother, whom Christ had honoured, who 
had laboured much, and turned many from darkness 
to light. He quotes it asa proof of his independ- 
ence amongst the Apostles, not without complacency. 
All this is consistent with his bold and resolute 
nature, which marched straight to its object, and 
refused to swerve, either out of respect of persons or 
out of fear. His steadfast resolution, that Christ 
should be all in all, came from above ; his manner of 
compassing it bears clear marks of his old nature. 
That blessed change under the power of grace can 
be perhaps more fully studied in St. Paul’s career 
than anywhere else in Church history; the strong, 
loving, fierce, harsh nature,—you see the faults trans- 
formed to virtues, the angles rounded off, the strong 

158 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

will made obedient to the bit and bridle of love ; and 
yet it is the same man still. You recognise the old 
features of the portrait, but it is transfigured by a 
preternatural light. Again, we will not praise nor 
blame ; we will rather recognise the power of the 
mighty Spirit of God ; which could use for His pur- 
poses the timid impulse of one man and the impatient 
zeal of another, for building up the House of God ; 
and at the same time could take in hand the timid 
and the impatient natures alike, and give courage to 
the one and softness to the other, thus building at 
onetimethe great House of God and carving delicately 
each living stone of which the House is compacted. 

I need not expose before you, Right Reverend 
Fathers, the theory of Apostolic history which has 
been built chiefly on this passage. That a permanent 
quarrel and schism arose from this time between the 
two Apostles, lasting to the very end; that the 
history of the Apostolic age is the tale of this great 
struggle between the Apostle who would maintain 
and the Apostle who would abolish the Mosaic law, 
with the efforts made from time to time to make 
peace between them; these positions have been main- 
tained by Baur and others, with great ingenuity, with 
wonderful exaggeration. Every page of the Gospels 
is supposed to bear marks of the struggle: Acts and 
Epistles are full of it. Modern criticism is as fanciful 
at times as those simple folk that peopled every wood 
with fays and sprites, looked for a dryad under every 
leaf and a nymph in every brook, and made out in the 
ordinary noises of the forest the voice of the god Pan. 
Common sense will not find anything in the Gospels 
that amounts even to a trace of this contention. Such 
a rupture could not have happened without leaving 
great marks everywhere. There are none. Luke, 
the friend of St. Paul, records in his Gospel things | 
that tend to St. Peter’s honour, which the other 
Gospels do not quote. Silas, the companion of Paul, 
was also the friend and companion of Peter. (1 Pet. 

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 159 

v. 12.) Lastly, when Peter writes his First Epistle to 
the Churches of Asia Minor, which Paul had founded, 
he says not a word to disparage the teaching of their 
founder: he says, “that this is the true grace of God, 
wherein ye stand.” None of these things is consis- 
tent with the theory of a feud and hatred between 
these two chief pillars of the Church. Critics magnify 
divergent opinions into schisms; a scratch into a 
gaping wound. Had those two noble natures gone 
asunder, in lasting wrath, every page of Church 
history would have borne loud witness to the great- 
ness of their sin. 

It is very common for us to look up out of our 
welter of troubles, our sects, and schisms, and dispu- 
tations, and to see far back in the first ages nothing 
but peace ; a united Church, offering its harmonious, 
universal praise, a well-drilled army, marching in 
obedience to a single will, a code of faith which 
always, everywhere, ail the faithful heard, and without 
questioning believed. But as the student draws near, 
the objects grow more distinct, the mists disperse, 
the shadows separate, and fall into their places ; and 
the rose-flush of the dawn ceases to conceal the true 
colours of that primeval region. Then we come to 
see something very different from our preconceptions, 
and learn, what is indeed gladness to learn, that upon 
the whole, in the old time as in the new, the Holy 
Spirit sent of the Lord has wrought in the Church 
in the same manner. He wasa Spirit of light and 
life and comfort to the souls of men; but then, as 
now, the men were enlightened, not transformed. 
And the glory of God’s great work lay in this—not 
that the powers, wishes, and passions of the actors 
were petrified into a lifeless uniformity, and the 
superseding life from heaven took their place: but 
rather that, using as His instruments men so weak and 
perverse, He built with them the Church of God. 
To me, I do confess, it is a comfort to know that the 
Church in the first age grew by the same principles 

160 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

as it grows by in the nineteenth ; that the very divi- 
sions amongst us have their counterparts in the age 
of the Apostles, and that our disputes, like theirs, may 
be but permitted struggles and aberrations of us who 
are acting out God’s great commands, and that all 
the while He is making perfect the circle of His 
purpose, and accomplishing His Kingdom. The 
Evangelists were not four scribes, inditing with 
servile hands a manifesto for the new kingdom of 
heaven: they were men full of the Holy Ghost, 
whose task came upon them in the course of God’s 
work, imposed by the march of events, yet not less 
truly by the voice of God, by whom the events were 
ordered. Are the Gospels less dear to you and me, 
from our knowing that oral preaching must have pre- 
ceded them, that other histories and treatises must 
have been written, of greater and of less importance, 
of which the inspired Evangelists had knowledge? 
That they wrote at last on account of the spreading 
of the Church, and the gradual dispersion of the Jews, 
and the approaching doom of the Holy City? The 
Gospels are four green branches on the growing 
stem of the Church ; are they therefore less divine 
to us who believe that the growth of the Church 
was divine? Beneath that growing tree the thorny 
branches of the old ceremonial law withered, gradu- 
ally, and there were disputes like this one between 
Paul and Peter, as to how and when the dead boughs 
should be cleared away. But the question has been 
wisely settled: it disturbs us no more, albeit the 
settlement was gradual and not without strife. The 
Church has grown, as all things seem to grow, by 
the life within her striving to perfect itself amidst 
opposing forces. So grows the acorn, pushing its 
weak shoots through hard ground, and its strength 
and dignity are not less that once the swinish jaws 
narrowly missed devouring the mast, and the 
swinish foot did actually trample it into the clay. 
So grew the liberties of the English people: are they 


Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 161 

less dear to us because they have been threatened, and 
at times eclipsed in the past? So grow the mind 
and spirit of a man, passing through trials and efforts, 
even through falls, to the ripeness of a resolute, 
tolerant, patient, helpful age. So grew the Church of 
Christ ; and her’ life is not less real, less secure, if she 
has passed sometimes through fears and fightings, and 
the deep waters of the proud have seemed to go even 
over her life. At one time Athanasius has had to stand 
against a world; at another a Hildebrand imperils 
the Church by making it the supreme Kingdom 
amongst the earthly kingdoms. Worldly motives are 
said to have tainted the reformation of religion in this 
country ; and it is true. So much the greater is our 
reason for blessing God, that the sweet honeycomb has 
come from the lion’s carcase; that amid the strifes 
and selfishness of kings, and the ignorance of peoples, 
the truth passed safely. So even now the Church is 
growing, and God dwelling in her gives the increase. 
We seem in deadly peril : there is unbelief on one side, 
and on the other that deadening system which would 
hand over the conscience to the priest, and the priest 
to a medieval theology, hostile to knowledge and 
incapable of change. “The waves of the sea are 
mighty, and rage horribly, but yet the Lord that 
dwelleth on high is mightier.” 

Yet there is one more lesson which the study of 
the past might bring us. By the vehemence of past 
disputes, nay by the bitter hatred that they have 
brought in, one might think that men had lost faith 
in the power of the Holy Ghost to keep safe the ark 
of God upon the stormy waters. To “withstand to 
the face” has been the ‘common remedy for emer- 
gencies. It may be permitted us reverently to doubt 
whether the pulse of divine life in the Church has 
been hastened by one beat, by the violence of the 
zealous, who have thought well to be angry for the 
cause of God. Through strife, but not by strife, 
the Church has passed upon her way. And we, 

162 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

Right Reverend Fathers, meeting a second time 
in conference upon the interests of that branch 
of the Church, which springing from this little island, 
has so spread over the earth that the sun never sets 
upon her daughter Churches, we will never admit 
a doubt that God is with us still. Struggle and 
conflict, and even partial failure shall not convince 
us that God has left us; they are the heritage of 
the Church from the beginning. The faces that we 
miss, and they are many, are of those that have passed 
to rest ; but the very words remind us that for us 
there is not rest. And whilst we are resolved to hold 
fast the faith committed to us, we may endeavour in 
one point to go beyond our fathers: the candour and 
the charity that springs from a firm trust in the truth, 
these should be our aim and special study. More than 
one writer has been pleased to point out that in the 
first century were three periods in which three 
Apostles, Peter, Paul, and John, predominated in 
succession: and they think they can trace the same 
succession in the larger field of Church history, 
so that the Petrine period ends at the Reformation, 
and the Pauline succeeds it, whilst the time of 
St. John is supposed to be beginning. There is 
something fanciful in this arrangement. Yet pardon 
the fancy for the truth that underlies it. And when 
Peter falters, impulsive, and is inconsistent with 
himself, and Paul withstands him to the face, let the 
third Apostle enter on the scene, and remind us that 
we can afford to use the largest charity whilst we 
hold still the firmest trust. His contribution to the 
eternal diapason of the Church’s faith and love shall 
be this: ‘Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the 
Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. 

_ And this commandment have we from him, 
That he who loveth God love his brother also. (1 John 
iv. 15, 21.) 

με eR. γϑ 

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 163 

No. XXI. (See page 32.) 

Letter of the Ricbada attending the Lambeth Conference 
of 1878, including the Reports adopted by the 


Introductory ... AA. πῇ "ΝΕ ... page 164 

Report of Committee on “ The tee mode of maintaining 
Union among the various Churches of the Anglican 
Communion” ... . 164 

Report of Committee on “ Wilds Heads of icbitees 
tion for Churches to which such an arrangement 
may be applicable” Gi Ne wi ass re, ee 

Report of Committee on “The relation to each other of 
Missionary Bishops and of Missionaries of various 
branches of the Anglican Communion, acting in the 
same country” ... if ὶ : 174 

Report of Committee on “The ἜΘ ΚΕ of ΠΕΣ ΤΗΝ 
Chaplains and nee αν i on the Continent of 
Europe and elsewhere”. oie Sis pane bale! LS 

Report of Committee Appointed to receive questions sub- 
mitted to them, in writing, by Bishops desiring the 
advice of the Conference on difficulties or problems 
they have met with in their several Dioceses, and to 
report thereon ... i ΝΥ ‘as Δὸν Στ BO 

Conclusion ἰς. δὰ τὴ, ae + a ἐπὰν 186 

164 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 



We, Archbishops, Bishops Metropolitan, and other 
Bishops of the Holy Catholic Church, in full com- 
munion with the Church of England, one hundred in 
number, all exercising superintendence over Dioceses, 
or lawfully commissioned to exercise Episcopal func- 
tions therein, assembled, many of us from the most 
distant parts of the earth, at Lambeth Palace, in the 
year of our Lord 1878, under the presidency of the 
most reverend Archibald Campbell, by Divine Pro- 
vidence Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of all 
England ; after receiving, in the private Chapel of 
the said Palace, the blessed Sacrament of the Lord’s 
Body and Blood, and after having united in prayer 
for the guidance of the Holy Spirit, have taken into 
our consideration various definite questions submitted 
to us affecting the condition of the Church in divers 
parts of the world, 

We have made these questions the subject of 
serious deliberation for many days, and we now com- 
mend to the faithful the conclusions which have been 

Report of Committee on the best mode of maintaining 
union among the various Churches of the A nglican 

1.—In considering the best mode of maintaining 
union among the various Churches of our Communion, 
the Committee, first of all, recognise, with deep 
thankfulness to Almighty God, the essential and 
evident unity in which the Church of England and 
the Churches in visible communion with her have 

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 165 

always been bound together! United under One 
Divine Head inthe fellowship of the One Catholic 
and Apostolic Church, holding the One Faith revealed 
in Holy Writ, defined in the Creeds, and maintained 
by the Primitive Church, receiving the same Canonical 
Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as con- 
taining all’ things necessary to salvation—these 
Churches teach the same Word of God, partake of 
the same divinely-ordained Sacraments, through the 
ministry of the same Apostolic orders, and worship 
one God and Father through the same Lord Jesus 
Christ, by the same Holy and Divine Spirit, Who is 
given to those that believe, to guide them into all 

2.—Together with this unity, however, there has 
existed among these Churches that variety of custom, 
discipline, and form of worship which necessarily 
results from the exercise by each “particular or 
national Church” of its right “to ordain, change, and 
abolish ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained 
only by man’s authority, so that all things be done 
to edifying.” We gladly acknowledge that there is 
at present no real ground for anxiety on account of 
this diversity ; but the desire has of late been largely 
felt and expressed, that some practical and efficient 
methods should be adopted, in order to guard against 
possible sources of disunion in the future, and at the 
same time further to manifest and cherish that true 
and substantial agreement which exists among these 
increasingly numerous Churches. 

3.—The method which first naturally suggests itselt 
is that which, originating with the inspired Apostles 
long served to hold all the Churches of Christ in one 
undivided and visible communion. The assembling, 
however, of a true General Council, such as the 
Church of England has always declared her readiness 
to resort to, is, in the present condition of Christen- 

1 Note A, p. 187. 

166 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

dom, unhappily but obviously impossible. The diffi- 
culties attending the assembling of a Synod of all 
the Anglican Churches, though different in character 
and less serious in nature, seem to us nevertheless 
too great to allow of our recommending it for present 

4.—The experiment, now twice tried, of a Con- 
ference of Bishops called together by the Archbishop 
of Canterbury, and meeting under his presidency, 
offers at least the hope that the problem, hitherto 
unsolved, of combining together for consultation 
representatives of Churches so differently situated 
and administered, may find, in the providential 
course of events, its own solution.! Your Committee 
would, on this point, venture to suggest that such 
Conferences, called together from time to time by 
the Archbishop of Canterbury, at the request of, or 
in consultation with, the Bishops of our Communion, 
might with advantage be invested in future with 
somewhat larger liberty as to the initiation and 
selection of subjects for discussion. For example, a 
Committee might be constituted, such as should 
represent, more or less completely, the several 
Churches of the Anglican Communion ; and to this 
Committee it might be entrusted to draw up, after 
receiving communications from the Bishops, a scheme 
of subjects to be discussed. 

5.—Meanwhile, there are certain principles of 
Church order which, your Committee consider, ought 
to be distinctly recognized and set forth, as of great 
importance for the maintenance of union ah oe the 
Churches of our Communion. 

(1.) First, that the duly-certified action of every 
national or particular Church, and of each ecclesias- 
tical Province (or Diocese not included in a Province), 
in the exercise of its own discipline, should be | 

‘ Note B, p 188. 

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 167 

respected by all the other Churches, and by their 
individual members. 

(2.) Secondly, that when a Diocese, or territorial 
sphere of administration, has been constituted by the 
authority of any Church or Province of this Com- 
munion within its own limits, no Bishop or other 
Clergyman of any other Church should exercise his 
functions within that Diocese without the consent of 
the Bishop thereof: | 

(3.) Thirdly, that no Bishop should authorize to 
officiate in his Diocese a clergyman coming from 
another Church or Province, unless such Clergyman 
present letters testimonial, countersigned by the 
Bishop of the Diocese from which he comes ; such 
letters to be, as nearly as possible, in the form 
adopted by such Church or Province in the case of 
the transfer of a clergyman from one Diocese to 

Passing to details, your Committee would call 
attention to the following points :— 

L—Of Church Organisation. 

6.—Inasmuch as the sufficient and effective organ- 
ization of the several parts of the Church tends to 
promote the unity of the whole, your Committee 
would, with this view, repeat the recommendation 
in the sixth report of the first Lambeth Conference,’ 
that those Dioceses which still remain isolated should, 
as circumstances may allow, associate themselves into 
a Province or Provinces, in accordance with the 
ancient laws and usages of the Catholic Church. 

1 This does not refer to .questions respecting missionary 
Bishops and foreign chaplaincies, which have been entrusted 
to other Committees. 

3 Note C, p. 191. 

168 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

11.—Of Common Work. 

7,—Believing that the unity of our Churches will 
be especially manifested and strengthened by their 
uniting together in common work, your Committee 
would call attention to the great value of such 
co-operation wherever the opportunity shall present 
itself ; as, for example, in founding and maintaining, 
in the missionary fields, schools for the training of a 
native ministry, such as that which is now contem- 
plated in Shanghai, and, generally, as far as may be 
possible, in prosecuting missionary work, such as 
that which the Churches in England and Scotland 
are maintaining together in Kaffraria. 

11.—Of Commendatory Letters. 

8—(1.) This Committee would renew the recom- 
mendation of the first Lambeth Conference, that 
letters commendatory should be given by their own 
Bishops to clergymen visiting for a time other 
Churches than those to which they belong. 

(2). They would urge yet more emphatically the 
importance of letters. commendatory being given by 
their own clergymen to members of their flocks 
going from one country to another. And they con- 
sider it desirable that the clergy should urge on such 
persons the duty of promptly presenting these 
letters, and should carefully instruct them as to the 
oneness of the Church in its Apostolical constitution 
under its varying organization and conditions. 

It may not, perhaps, be considered foreign to this 
subject to suggest here the importance of impressing 
upon our people the extent and geographical dis- 
tribution of our Churches, and of reminding them 
that there is now hardly any part of the world where 
members of our Communion may not find a Church 
one with their own in faith, order, and worship. 

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 169 

1V.—Of circulating Information as to the Churches. 

9.—It appears that the want has been much felt 
of some centre of communication among the 
Churches in England, Ireland, Scotland, America, 
India, the Colonies, and elsewhere, through which 
ecclesiastical documents of importance might be 
mutually circulated, and in which copies of them 
might be retained for reference. Your Committee 
would suggest that the Society for Promoting 
Christian Knowledge might be requested to maintain 
a department for this purpose, supported by special 
contributions ; and also that provision might be made 
for the more general dissemination in each Church 
of information respecting the acts and current history 
of all the rest. They recommend that the Reports 
and other proceedings of this Conference, which it 
may think fit to publish, should be communicated 
through this channel. They further think it desi- 
rable that the official acts, and other published 
documents of each representative body of this Com- 
munion, should be interchanged among the respective 
Bishops and the officers of such bodies. 

v.—Of a Day of Intercession, 

10.—Remembering the blessing promised to united 
intercession, and believing that such intercession 
ever tends to deepen and strengthen that unity of 
His Church for which Our Lord earnestly pleaded 
in His great intercessory prayer, your Committee 
trust that this Conference will give the weight of its 
recommendation to the observance throughout the 
Churches of this Communion of a season of prayer 
for the unity of Christendom. This recommendation 
has been, to some extent, anticipated by the practice 
adopted of late years of setting apart a Day of | 
Intercession for Missions. Your Committee would 


170 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

by no means wish to interfere with an observance 
which appears to have been widely accepted, and 
signally blessed of God. But, as our Divine Lord 
has so closely connected the unity of His followers 
with the world’s belief in His own Mission from the 
Father, it seems to us that intercessions for the 
enlargement of His Kingdom may well be joined 
with earnest prayer that all who profess faith in Him 
may be one flock under one Shepherd. With respect 
to the day, your Committee have been informed that 
the Festival of St. Andrew, hitherto observed as the 
Day of Intercession for Missions, is found to be 
unsuitable to the circumstances of the Church in 
many parts of the world. They, therefore, venture 
to suggest that, after the present year, the time 
selected should be the Tuesday before Ascension 
Day (being a Rogation Day), or any of the seven 
days after that Tuesday; and they hope that all 
the Bishops of the several Churches will commend 
this observance to their respective Dioceses. 

vi.i—Of Diversities in Worship. 

11—Your Committee, believing that, next to 
oneness in “the Faith once delivered to the saints,” 
communion in worship is the link which most firmly 
binds together bodies of Christian men, and remem- 
bering that the book of Common Prayer, retained as 
it is, with some modifications, by all our Churches, 
has been one principal bond of union among them, 
desire to call attention to the fact that such com- 
munion in worship may be endangered by excessive 
diversities of ritual. They believe that the internal 
unity of the several Churches will help greatly to the 
union of these one with another. And, while they 
consider that such large elasticity in the forms of 
worship is desirable as will give wide scope to all 
legitimate expressions of devotional feeling, they 

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 171 

would appeal, on the other hand, to the Apostolic 
precept that “all things be done unto edifying,” and 
to the Catholic principle that order and obedience, 
even at the sacrifice of personal preferences and 
tastes, lie at the foundation of Christian unity, and 
are even essential to the successful maintenance of 
the Faith. 

12.—They cannot leave this subject without ex- 
pressing an earnest hope that Churchmen of all 
views, however varying, will recognise the duty of 
submitting themselves, for conscience sake, in matters 
ritual and ceremonial, to the authoritative judgments 
of that particular or national Church in which, by 
God’s Providence, they may be placed; and that 
they will abstain from all that tends to estrangement 
or irritation, and will rather daily and fervently pray 
that the Holy Spirit may guide every member of the 
Church to “think and do always such things as be 
rightful,’ and that He may unite us all in that 
brotherly charity which is “the very bond of peace 
and of all virtues,” 

Report of Committee on Voluntary Boards of Arbi- 
tration for Churches to which such an arrangement 
may be applicable. 

1.—Your Committee beg to submit the following 
Report :— | 

2.—The necessity for considering the subject 
which is entrusted to your Committee—namely, 
Voluntary Boards of Arbitration for Churches to 
which such an arrangement may be applicable—has 
arisen from the fact that there is no appeal from the 
Ecclesiastical Tribunals in the Colonial Churches to 
any of the ordinary Ecclesiastical Courts of England, 
or to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, 
when advising Her Majesty on appeals from Eccle- 
siastical Courts. No questions relating to the exer- 

M 2 

172 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

cise of discipline in a Colonial Church can come 
before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, 
except on appeal from Civil Courts in the colony, 
exercising jurisdiction in matters affecting property 
or civil rights. The subject, therefore, before your 
Committee is not the constitution or jurisdiction of 
Provincial or Diocesan tribunals, but whether there 
should be some external tribunals or “ Voluntary 
Boards of Arbitration” to which an appeal or refer- 
ence ought to be made; how such Boards, when 
necessary, should be constituted; and under what 
circumstances they should be approached. 

3.—Your Committee, having taken into considera- 
tion the whole question, especially with reference to 
the action of some of the Colonial Churches since 
1867, when a Report bearing upon this subject was 
prepared by a Committee of the Lambeth Confer- 
ence held in that year, would make the following 
general recommendations :— 

4.—I. (a) Every Ecclesiastical Province, which has 
constituted for the exercise of discipline over its 
clergy a tribunal for receiving appeals from its 
Diocesan Courts, should be held responsible for its 
own decisions in the exercise of such discipline ; and 
your Committee are not prepared to recommend that 
there should be any one central tribunal of appeal 
from such Provincial tribunals. 

5.—() If any Province is desirous that its tri- 
bunals of appeal should have power to obtain, in 
matters of doctrine, or of discipline involving a 
question of doctrine, the opinion of some council of 
reference before pronouncing sentence, your Com- 
mittee consider that the conditions of such reference 
must be determined by the Province itself; but that 
the opinion of the council should be given on a con- 
sideration of the facts of the case, sent up to it in 
writing by the tribunal of appeal, and not merely on 
an abstract question of doctrine. 

6.—(c) In Dioceses which have not yet been com- 

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 173 

bined into a Province, or which may be geographically 
incapable of being so combined, your Committee 
recommend that appeals should lie from the Diocesan 
Courts to the Archbishop of Canterbury, to be heard 
by his Grace with such assistance as he may deem 
best. The circumstances of each Diocese must 
determine how such consensual jurisdiction could be 

7.—II. As regards the very grave question of the 
trial of a Bishop, inasmuch as any tribunal, consti- 
tuted for this purpose by a Province, is necessarily a 
tribunal of first instance, it would, in the opinion of 
your Committee, be expedient that, when any such 
provisions can be introduced by voluntary compact 
into the constitutions or canons of any Church, the 
following conditions should be observed :— 

8.—(a) When any Bishop shall have been sen- 
tenced by the tribunal constituted for the trial of a 
Bishop in any Ecclesiastical Province, if no Bishop 
of the Province, other than the accused, shall dissent 
from the judgment, there should be no appeal, pro- 
vided that the case be heard by not fewer than five 
Bishops, who shall be unanimous in their judgment. 

9.—(d) If, in consequence of the small number of 
Bishops in a Province, or from any other sufficient 
cause, a tribunal of five comprovincial Bishops can- 
not be formed, your Committee would suggest that 
the Province should provide for the enlargement of 
the tribunal by the addition of Bishops from a 
neighbouring Province. 

10.—(c) In the event of the Provincial tribunal 
not fulfilling the conditions indicated in paragraph 8 
of this Report, your Committee would suggest that, 
whenever an external tribunal of appeal is not pro- 
vided in the Canons of that Province, it should be 
in the power of the accused Bishop, if condemned, 
to require the Provincial tribunal to refer the case to 
at least five Metropolitans or chief Bishops of the 
Anglican Communion to be named in the said 

174 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

Canons, of whom the Archbishop of Canterbury 
should be one ; and that, if any three of these shall 
require that the case, or any portion of it, shall be 
re-heard or reviewed, it should be so re-heard or 

11.—(d@) In cases in which an Ecclesiastical Pro- 
vince desires to have a tribunal of appeal from its 
Provincial tribunal for trying a Bishop, your Com- 
mittee consider that such tribunal should consist of 
not less than five Bishops of the Churches of the 
Anglican Communion, under the presidency of the 
Archbishop of Canterbury, if his Grace will consent 
nti with the assistance of laymen learned in the 

Report of Committee on the velation to each other of 
Missionary Bishops and of Missionaries of 
various branches of the Anglican Communion 
acting in the same country. 

1.—Your Committee beg to submit the following 
Report :— 

2.—Your Committee have had before them the 
question of providing Books of Common Prayer for 
converts from heathenism, suitable to the special 
wants of various countries ; and they recommend as 
follows :— 

3.—They think it very important that such books 
should not be introduced or multiplied without proper 
authority ; and, since grave inconvenience might 
follow the use of different Prayer Books in the same 
district, in English and American Missions, they 
recommend that, whenever it is possible, one Prayer 
Book only should be in use. 

4.—It is expedient that Books of Common Prayer, 
suitable to the needs of native congregations in 
heathen countries, should be framed: that the prin- 

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 175 

ciples embodied in such books should be identical 
with the principles embodied in the Book of Common 
Prayer ; and that the deviations from the Book of 
Common Prayer in point of form should only be 
such as are required by the circumstances of par- 
ticular churches. | 

5.—In the case of heathen countries not under 
English or American rule, any such book should be 
approved by a Board consisting of the Bishop or 
Bishops under whose authority the. book is intended 
to be used, and of certain clergymen, not less than 
three where possible, from the diocese or dioceses, or 
district, and should then be communicated by such 
Bishop or Bishops, or by the Metropolitan of the 
province to which any such Bishop belongs, to a 
Board in England, consisting of the Archbishops of 
England and Ireland, the Bishop of London, the 
Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, together 
with two Bishops and four clergymen selected by 
them, and also to a Board appointed by the General 
Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in 
the United States of America. 

6.—No such book should be held to have been 
authorised for use in public worship unless it have 
received the sanction of these two Boards. 

7.—In any Diocese of a country under English 
rule all such new books, being modifications or 
versions of the Book of Common Prayer, should be 
submitted, after approval by local authority, to the 
Board in England only. 


8.—Your Committee have considered the case of 
Missions in countries not under English or American 
rule, and they recommend as follows :— 

g.—In cases where two Bishops of the Anglican 
Communion are ministering in the same country, as 
in China, Japan, and Western Africa at the present 

176 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

time, your Committee are of opinion that under 
existing circumstances each Bishop should have 
control of his own clergy, and their converts and 

10.—The various Bishops in the same country 
should endeavour, as members of the same Com- 
munion, to keep up brotherly intercourse with each 
other on the subject of their Missionary work. 

11.—In countries not under English or American 
rule, the English or American Church would not 
ordinarily undertake to establish Dioceses with 
strictly-defined territorial limits ; although either 
Church might indicate the district in which it was 
intended that the Missionary Bishop should labour. 

12.—Bishops in the same country should take care 
not to interfere in any manner with the congrega- 
tions or converts of each other. 

13.—It is most undesirable that either Church 
should for the future send a Bishop or Missionaries 
to a town or district already occupied by a Bishop 
of another branch of the Anglican Communion. 

14.—When it is intended to send forth any new 
Missionary Bishop, notification of such an intention 
should be sent beforehand to the Archbishop of 
Canterbury, to the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant 
Episcopal Church in the United States of America, 
and to the Metropolitan of any Province near which 
the Missionary Bishop is to minister. 


15.—Your Committee have had before them a 
communication from the Bishop of Calcutta, dated 
June 4th, 1878, containing Resolutions of the Bishops 
of India and Ceylon, also a letter from Bishop Cald- 
well, dated June Ist, 1878, on the subject of the 
relation of Bishops abroad to the Missionaries in 
their Dioceses or districts. 

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 177 

16.—The questions raised by the Bishop of 
Calcutta’s communication relate to the power and 
authority of the Bishop in respect of giving and 
withdrawing the licences, Ist, of the clergy under 
his charge ; 2nd, of lay readers and catechists ; also 
᾿ το the rights of the Bishop in reference to changes 
in the management, order of service, and place of 
worship of any congregation. 

17.—As regards the licensing of the clergy, it is 
admitted generally that every Missionary clergyman, 
whether appointed by a society or otherwise, should 
receive the licence of the Bishop in whose Diocese 
he is to labour; but your Committee are of opinion 
that, in case of refusal to give a licence to a clergy- 
man, the Bishop should, if the clergyman desire it, 
state the reasons of his refusal, and transmit them 
to the Metropolitan, who should have power to 
decide upon their sufficiency ; such reasons should 
also be accessible to the person whose licence is in 
question. Where there is no Metropolitan, the 
reasons should be transmitted to the Archbishop of 
Canterbury, who should decide in like manner. 

18.—As regards the withdrawal of a licence, your 
Committee find that in some Provinces the mode of 
proceeding for revocation has been fixed by canon, 
and the jurisdiction thus created has been established 
by consent. For these places it is not necessary to 
make any recommendations. Where no such juris- 
diction exists, your Committee recommend that the 
Bishop should in no case proceed to the revocation 
of a clergyman’s licence without affording him the 
opportunity of showing cause against it, and that if 
the Bishop shall afterwards proceed to revoke the 
licence, he should, if the clergyman desire it, state 
the reasons for his decision to such clergyman, and 
also to the Metropolitan, who should have power to 
sanction or disallow the revocation. In cases where 
there is no Metropolitan, the Archbishop of Canter- 
bury should be regarded as the Metropolitan for this 

178 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

purpose. No such revocation should take place, 
except for grave ecclesiastical offences. 

19.—The Bishop would probably find it desirable, 
where the clergyman is connected with one of the 
great Missionary societies, to communicate with the 
society, or its local representatives, before taking 
steps for revocation of a licence. 

20.—With regard to lay agents, your Committee 
consider it desirable that such as are employed in 
more important spiritual functions should have the 
licence, or other express sanction of the Bishop ; and 
that other laymen employed in Missionary work 
should be considered to have the implied sanction of 
the Bishop, and should not continue to be so em- 
ployed, if the Bishop see fit, for a grave reason, to 
forbid them. 

21.—The authority of the Bishop in appointing 
places for public worship has been always admitted 
in the Church. Every place in which the Holy 
Communion is regularly celebrated should have the 
sanction of the Bishop. 

22.—Your Committee have been asked for an 
opinion as to Subordinate, Co-ordinate, or Suffragan 
Bishops in India, to minister to native congregations, 
within the limits of another Diocese. Your Com- 
mittee think that there are manifest objections to 
the appointment of a Bishop to minister to certain 
congregations within the Diocese of another Bishop, 
and wholly independent of him. Your Committee 
think that, for the present, the appointment of 
Assistant Bishops, whether European or native, sub- 
ordinate to the Bishop of the Diocese, would meet 
the special needs of India in this matter, and would 
offer the best security for order and peace. 

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 179 

Report of Committee on the position of Anglican 
Chaplains and Chaplainctes on the Continent of 
Europe and elsewhere. 

1.—Your Committee have to report that they have 
agreed to the following recommendations :— 

2.—I. That it is highly desirable that Anglican 
congregations, on the Continent of Europe and else- 
where, should be distinctly urged not to admit the 
stated ministrations of any clergyman without the 
written licence or permission of the Bishop of the 
Anglican Communion who is duly authorised to 
grant it; and that the occasional assistance of 
strangers should not be invited or permitted without 
some satisfactory evidence of their ordination and 
character as clergymen. 

3.—II. That it is desirable, as a general rule, that 
two chapels shall not be established where one is 
sufficient for the members of both Churches, 
American and English; also that where there is 
only one church or chapel the members of both 
Churches should be represented on the Committee, 
if any. 

4.—II]. That it be suggested to the Societies 
which partly support Continental Chaplaincies, that, 
in places where English and American churchmen 
reside or visit, and especially where Americans out- 
number the English, it may be desirable to appoint 
a properly-accredited clergyman of the American 

5.—IV. That your Committee, having carefully 
considered a Memorial addressed to the Archbishops 
and Bishops of the Church of England by four 
Priests and certain other members of “the Spanish 
and Portuguese Reformed Episcopal Church,” pray- 
ing for the consecration of a Bishop, cannot but 
express their hearty sympathy with the Memorialists 
in the difficulties of their position ; and, having heard 
a statement on the subject of the proposed extension 

180 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

of the Episcopate to Mexico by the American 
Church, they venture to suggest that, when a Bishop 
shall have been consecrated by the American Church 
for Mexico, he might be induced to visit Spain and 
Portugal, and render such assistance at this stage of 
the movement as may seem to him practicable and 

Report of Commutice appointed to receive questions 
subniitted to them, in writing, by Bishops desiring 
the advice of the Conference on daifficulties or 
problems they have met with in their several 
Dioceses, and to report thereon. 

Attention has been called to the following subjects 
by questions submitted to your Committee :— 


1.—The position which the Anglican Church 
should assume towards the “Old Catholics” and 
towards other persons on the Continent of Europe 
who have renounced their allegiance to the Church of 
Rome, and who are desirous of forming some con- 
nection with the Anglican Church, either English or 

2.—Applications for intercommunion between 
themselves and the Anglican Church from persons 
connected with the Armenian and other Christian 
communities in the East. 

3.—The position of Moravian ministers within 
the territorial limits of Dioceses of the Anglican 


1.—The West Indian Dioceses. 
(a) Their proposed Provincial organization. 
(ὁ) The position of their Diaconate. 
2.—The Church of Haiti. 

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 181 

Local peculiarities regarding the Laws of Marriage. 

A Board of Reference for matters connected. with 
Foreign Missions. 
Difficulties arising in the Church of England from 

the revival of obsolete forms of Ritual, and from 
erroneous teaching on the subject of Confession. 

Vy # 

The fact that a solemn protest is raised in so many 
Churches and Christian communities throughout the 
world against the usurpations of the See of Rome, 
and against the novel doctrines promulgated by its 
authority, is a subject for thankfulness to Almighty 
God. All sympathy is due from the Anglican 
Church to the Churches and individuals protesting 
against these errors, and labouring, it may be, under 
special difficulties, from the assaults of unbelief as 
well as from the pretensions of Rome. 

We acknowledge but one Mediator between God 
and men—the Man Christ Jesus, Who is over all, 
God blessed for ever. We reject, as contrary to the 
Scriptures and to Catholic truth, any doctrine which 
would set up other mediators in His place, or which 
would take away from the Divine Majesty of the 
fulness of the Godhead which dwelleth in Him, and 
which gave an infinite value to the spotless Sacrifice 
which He offered, once for all, on the Cross for the 
sins of the whole world. 

It is therefore our duty to warn the faithful that 
the act done by the Bishop of Rome, in the Vatican 
Council, in the year 1870—whereby he asserted a 
supremacy over all men in matters both of faith and 

182 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

morals, on the ground of an assumed infallibility— 
was an invasion of the attributes of the Lord Jesus 

The principles on which the Church of England 
has reformed itself are well known. We proclaim 
the sufficiency and supremacy of the Holy Scriptures 
as the ultimate rule of faith,and commend to our 
people the diligent study of the same. We confess 
our faith in the words of the ancient Catholic creeds. 
We retain the Apostolic order of Bishops, Priests, 
and Deacons. We assert the just liberties of par- 
ticular or national Churches. We provide our people, 
in their own tongue, with a Book of Common Prayer 
and Offices for the administration of the Sacraments, 
in accordance with the best and most ancient types 
of Christian faith and worship. These documents 
are before the world, and can be known and read of 
all men. We gladly welcome every effort for reform 
upon the model of the Primitive Church. We do 
not demand a rigid uniformity ; we deprecate need- 
less divisions; but to those who are drawn to us in 
the endeavour to free themselves from the yoke of 
error and superstition we are ready to offer all help, 
and such privileges as may be acceptable to them 
and are consistent with the maintenance of our own 
principles as enunciated in our formularies. 

Your Committee recommend that questions of the 
class now submitted to them be dealt with in this 
spirit. For the consideration, however, of any definite 
cases in which advice and assistance may, from time 
to time, be sought, your Committee recommend that 
the Archbishops of England and Ireland, with the 
Bishop of London, the Primus of the Scottish Epis- 
copal Church, and the Presiding Bishop of the 
Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of 
America, the Bishop superintending the congrega- 
tions of the same upon the Continent of Europe, and 
the Bishop of Gibraltar, together with such other 
Bishops as they may associate with themselves, be 

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 183 

requested to advise upon such cases as circumstances 
may require. 

With regard to the special questions now raised 
respecting Moravian Orders,! the above-mentioned 
prelates are recommended to associate with them- 
selves such learned persons as they may deem emi- 
nently qualified to assist them by their knowledge 
of the historical difficulties involved. 


1.—(a) With respect to the West Indian Dioceses, 
assuming such Dioceses to desire to be combined into 
a Province, your Committee advise that the formal 
consent of the Diocesan Representative Synods, if 
free (as regards their relation to the State) to give 
such consent, be first obtained. 

The Bishops of the several Dioceses would then 
forward such formal consent, or expressed desire, to 
the Archbishop of Canterbury, requesting him to 
give his sanction to the formation of the Province. 

Whether the General Synod of the Province should 
consist of the Bishops, with representatives of the 

1 The special questions submitted were the following :— 

τ Ifa Moravian presbyter or deacon desires to be received 
into the Anglican Ministry, ought I to (a) ordain him abso- 
lutely ; (4) reordain him conditionally ; (c) accept his orders as 
valid, and simply give him mission in the Anglican Church? 

“5. Can I canonically and regularly commission a Bishop of 
the Unitas Fratrum in my Diocese either to confirm or to ordain 
for me, or to do both Episcopal acts according to the Anglican 
ritual ? 

“3. Am I justified, if called on, to confirm children, or ordain 
presbyters or deacons, or do both for the Moravians, in their 
churches, and according to their ritual? 

“4. May Anglican presbyters and deacons, with their Bishop’s 
sanction, officiate and minister the sacraments in Moravian 
churches, according to their ritual, and invite Moravian pres- 

. byters or deacons to execute the furictions appertaining to their 
office in Anglican churches, and according to Anglican ritual?” 

184 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

clergy and laity of the respective Dioceses, or should 
consist of the Bishops of the Province only ; and, in 
the latter case, what limitation should be imposed 
on the powers of such purely Episcopal Synod, is a 
question which ought to be left to the Diocesan 
Synods to decide, with the approval of the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury. 

If the West Indian Dioceses be formed into a 
Province, it seems desirable that a Metropolitan 
should be, in the first instance, elected from and 
by the Bishops of the West Indian Dioceses. 

(4) The questions! submitted respecting the pecu- 
liar circumstances of the West Indian Diaconate 
appear to your Committee, upon full consideration, 
to be such as can be adequately decided only in 
Diocesan or Provincial Synods. 

2.—Your Committee desire to express their satis- 
faction on learning that a Church in connexion with 
the Anglican Communion has been planted in the 
island of Haiti; that a Bishop has been consecrated 
thereto by Bishops of the Protestant Episcopal 
Church in the United States of America, and the 
Bishop of Kingston, Jamaica; and that successful 
efforts are being made for the training of a native 
Ministry ; and your Committee trust that God’s 
blessing may rest upon the Bishop, Priests, and 
Deacons, and all other members of this Church. 

‘ These questions raised the following points :— 

1. The desirableness, or otherwise, of recognising a Diaco- 
nate which, in certain cases, shall be practically permanent, 
instead of regarding the Diaconate as the invariable step to 
the Presbyterate. 

2. The desirableness, or otherwise, of permitting Deacons 
to engage in such secular callings as are not inconsistent with 
the due and edifying discharge of sacred functions. 

3. What modifications, if any, should be allowed as regards 
the intellectual qualifications and tests to be required of, and 
imposed on, such laymen as desire to become Deacons without 
relinquishing their secular vocation. 

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 185 

With regard to those questions in connexion with 
the Laws of Marriage which have been submitted 
to them, your Committee, while fully recognising the 
difficulties in which various branches of the Church 
have been placed by the action of local Legislatures, 
are of opinion that steps should be taken by each 
branch of the Church, according to its own discre- 
tion, to maintain the sanctity of marriage, agreeably 
to the principles set forth in the Word of God, as 
the Church of Christ hath hitherto received the 


With respect to what has been submitted to us on 
the subject of Foreign Missions, your Committee are 
of opinion that it is desirable to appoint a Board of 
Reference, to advise upon questions brought before 
it either by Diocesan or Missionary Bishops or by 
Missionary Societies. Your Committee are further 
of opinion that the details of the formation and con- 
_ stitution of such Board ought to be referred to the 
Archbishops of England and Ireland, the Bishop of 
London, the Primus of the Scottish Episcopal 
Church, the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant 
Episcopal Church in the United States of America, 
with the Bishop superintending the congregations 
of the same upon the Continent of Europe, and 
such other Bishops as they may associate with them- 
selves, who should communicate with the authorities 
of the various Colonial Churches, and with the ex- 

isting Missionary Organisations of the Anglican 


Considering unhappy disputes on questions of 

_ ritual, whereby divers congregations in the Church 

of England and elsewhere have been seriously dis- 

quieted, your Committee desire to affirm the prin- 

186 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

ciple that no alteration from long-accustomed ritual 
should be made contrary to the admonition of the 
Bishop of the Diocese. 

Further, having in view certain novel practices 
and teachings on the subject of Confession, your 
Committee desire to affirm that in the matter of 
Confession the Churches of the Anglican Communion 
hold fast those principles which are set forth in the 
Holy Scriptures, which were professed by the Primi- 
tive Church, and which were re-affirmed at the 
English Reformation; and it is their deliberate 
opinion that no minister of the Church is authorised 
to require from those who may resort to him to open 
their grief a particular or detailed enumeration of 
all their sins, or to require private confession previous 
to receiving the Holy Communion, or to enjoin or 
even encourage the practice of habitual confession 
to a Priest, or to teach that such practice of habitual 
confession, or the being subject to what has been 
termed the direction of a Priest, is a condition of 
attaining to the highest spiritual life. At the same 
time your Committee are not to be understood as 
desiring to limit in any way the provision made 
in the Book of Common Prayer for the relief of 
troubled consciences. 

These are the Reports of the Conference, and the 
practical conclusions at which we have arrived. 
Some of these conclusions have reference to the 
special circumstances of different branches of the 
One Church of Christ, according to peculiarities of 
their various Missionary work for the heathen, or 
their labours amongst their own people ; some em- 
body principles which apply to all branches of the 
Church Universal. They are all limited in their 
scope to those subjects which have been distinctly 
brought before the assembled Bishops. We invite 
to them the attention of the various Synods and 

Offical “ Letter” of 1878. 187 

other governing powers in the several Churches, and 
of all the faithful in Christ Jesus throughout the 

We do not claim to be lords over God’s heritage, 
but we commend the results of this our Conference 
to the reason and conscience of our brethren as 
enlightened by the Holy Spirit of God, praying that 
all throughout the world who call upon the name of 
our Lord Jesus Christ may be of one mind, may be 
united in one fellowship, may hold fast the Faith 
once delivered to the saints, and worship their one 
Lord in the spirit of purity and love. | 

Signed, on behalf of the Conference, - 

Secretary of the Conference. 

Secretary of Committees. 

I. BRUNEL, Chancellor of the Diocese of Ely, 
Assistant Secretary. 

NOTE A (page 165). 

The Churches thus united are, at this time, the 
Church of England and the Churches planted by 
her in India, the Colonies, and elsewhere, most of 
which Churches are associated into distinct Pro- 
vinces!; the Church of Ireland; the Episcopal 

* There are six Provinces, viz. :— 
India, with six Dioceses. 
Canada, with nine Dioceses. 
Rupertsland, with four Dioceses. 
South Africa, with eight Dioceses. 
Australia, with twelve Dioceses. 
New Zealand, with seven Dioceses. 
And there are twenty Dioceses not yet associated in Provinces. 
N 2 

188 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

Church in Scotland; the Protestant Episcopal 
Church in the United States of America, with its 
Missionary Branches; and the Church in Haiti. 
Among the external evidences of the unity of these 
Churches, none is more significant than that 
- which frequently occurs—the uniting of Bishops of 
different Churches, eg., of English, Scottish, and 
American Bishops, in that most important function 
by which the Episcopal succession is continued. On 
more than one occasion, also, the Church in Scotland 
has consecrated a Bishop in behalf of the Church of 
England, when legal difficulties have impeded the 
consecration in England.) 

NOTE B (page 166). 

One of the results of the first Lambeth Con- 
ference was the appointment of a Committee to 
prepare a Bill for placing on a more satisfactory 
footing the status in England of clergy ordained by 
Bishops of Colonial and .other Churches outside the 
Church in England. 

A Bill to effect this object was introduced by 
Lord Blachford into Parliament in the Session of 
1873, and became law in the Session of 1874, under 
the name of “The Colonial Clergy Act, 1874.” 
(37 & 38 Vict., cap. 77.) 

The Act does not apply to the clergy of the 
Episcopal Church in Scotland. The legal disabilities 
of the Scottish clergy were removed, and _ their 
position defined, by the Act 27 & 28 Vict., cap 94. 

With this exception, the Act of 1874 deals with 
the status of all clergy ordained by Bishops other 
than Bishops of Dioceses in England and Ireland. 
It proceeds upon the assumption that all clergymen 
so ordained may be admitted to exercise their 
functions in the Church of England; but that the 
Bishops of that Church have a right, in respect of 

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 189 

these clergy, to discretionary powers, analogous to 
those which they have in the case of ordination. 

The following are the provisions of the Act which 
affect the clergy ordained by Bishops other than 
those of (1) Dioceses in England; or (2) The 
Church of Ireland; or (3) The Episcopal Church in 
Scotland. — 

“Section 3.—Except as hereinafter mentioned, no 
person who has been or shall be ordained Priest or 
Deacon, as the case may be, by any Bishop other 
than a Bishop of a Diocese in one of the Churches 
aforesaid shall, unless he shall hold or have pre- 
viously held preferment or a curacy in England, 
officiate as such Priest or Deacon in any church or 
chapel in England, without written permission from 
the Archbishop of the Province in which he proposes 
to officiate, and without also making and subscribing 
so much of the declaration contained in ‘The 
Clerical Subscription Act, 1865, as follows—that 
is to say: 

“*T assent to the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, 
and to the Book of Common Prayer, and of the 
Ordering of Bishops, Priests,and Deacons. I believe 
the doctrine of the Church of England as therein 
set forth to be agreeable to the Word of God ; and 
in public prayer and administration of the sacra- 
ments, I, whilst ministering in England, will use the 
form in the said Book prescribed and none other, 
except so far as shall be ordered by lawful authority.’ 

“Section 4.—Except as hereinafter mentioned, no 
person who has been or shall be ordained Priest or 
Deacon, as the case may be, by any Bishop other 
than a Bishop of a Diocese in one of the Churches 
aforesaid, shall be entitled as such Priest or Deacon 
to be admitted or instituted to any benefice or other 
ecclesiastical preferment in England, or to act as 
Curate therein, without the previous consent in 
writing of the Bishop of the Diocese in which suca 
preferment or curacy may be situate. 

190 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

“Section 5.—Any person holding ecclesiastical pre- 
ferment, or acting as Curate in any Diocese in 
England under the provisions of this Act, may, with 
the written consent of the Bishop of such Diocese, 
request the Archbishop of the Province to give him 
a licence in writing under his hand and seal in the 
following form—that is to say :— 

“«To the Rev. A. B., 

“« We, C., by Divine Providence Archbishop of D., 
do hereby give you, the said A. &., authority to 
exercise your office of Priest (ov Deacon) according 
to the provisions of an Act of the thirty-seventh and 
thirty-eighth years of her present Majesty, intituled 
“An Act respecting Colonial and certain other 

“* Given under our hand and seal on the 
day of 


And if the Archbishop shall think fit to issue such 
licence, the same shall be registered in the registry of 
the Province, and the person receiving the licence 
shall thenceforth possess all such rights and advan- 
tages, and be subject to all such duties and liabilities, 
as he would have possessed and been subject to if 
he had been ordained by the Bishop of a Diocese in 
England: Provided that no such licence shall be 
issued to any person who has not held ecclesiastical 
preferment or acted as Curate for a period or periods 
exceeding in the aggregate two years.” 

The Act also contains the following provision as 
to the Consecration of Bishops :— 

“ Section 12.—It shall be lawful for the Archbishop 
of Canterbury or the Archbishop of York, for the 
time being, in consecrating any person to the office 
of a Bishop, for the purpose of exercising Episcopal 
functions elsewhere than in England, to dispense, if 

Latin Version of “Letter” of 1878. IQI 

he think fit, with the oath of due obedience to the 

NOTE C (page 167). 

The following extract from the Report refers to 
this subject :—“ Your Committee strongly recommend 
that all those Dioceses which are not as yet gathered 
into Provinces should, as soon as possible, form part 
of some Provincial organization. The particular 
mode of effecting this in each case must be deter- 
mined by those who are concerned.” 

The Committee would also call attention to the 
concluding paragraph of the same Report :— 

“Tn the case of the limits of an existing Province 
being altered, the consent of the Synod of that 
Province would be required for the alteration.” 

No. XXII. (See page 32.) 

Latin and Greek Versions of the Bishops’ Letter of 
1878. © 




Fidelibus in Christo salutem in Domino. 

Nos Archiepiscopi, Metropolitani, aliique Episcopi 
Sancte Catholice Ecclesie, centum numero, cum 
Ecclesia Anglicana plenarié communicantes, universi 
super Diceceses jurisdictionem Episcopalem exerci- 
tantes, vel ad Episcopalia munia in eis obeunda legi- 

192 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

time delegati, multi nostrim ex remotissimis orbis 
terrarum regionibus, congregati in Palatio Lam- 
bethano, anno salutis MDCCCLXXVIII. przsidente 
Reverendissimo Przsule Archibaldo Campbell, Di- 
vina Providentia Archiepiscopo Cantuariensi, totius 
Angliz Primate, participes facti, in dicti Palati 
sacello, Sacrosanctorum Mysteriorum Corporis et 
Sanguinis Domini Nostri Jesu Christi, et orationibus 
adunati ad Spirits Sancti directionem impetrandam, 
de variis prefinitis quzstionibus consilium inivimus 
coetui nostro propositis, ad statum Ecclesiz perti- 
nentibus per diversas mundi partes diffuse. 

His quzstionibus serio deliberandis complures dies 
impendimus, jamque determinationes earum a nobis 
approbatas fidelibus in Christo commendamus.! 

Quz sit optima ratio pensitantes unitatis con- 
servande inter varias nostre Communionis Eccle- 
5145, primum omnium Deo Omnipotenti gratias 
agentes quam maximas, manifestam unitatem ag- 
noscimus, qua Ecclesia Anglicana, et Ecclesize cum 
illa visibiliter communicantes, jugiter connexe per- 

Conjuncte invicem sub Uno Divino Capite, Jesu 
Christo, in unius Catholice et Apostolicz Ecclesiz 
societate, firmiter tenentes unam Fidem, in Verbo 
Dei revelatam, Symbolis definitam, et a Primitiva 
Ecclesia constanter conservatam, easdem Canonicas 
Scripturas Veteris et Novi Testamenti recipientes, 
utpote omnia continentes ad salutem sempiternam 
necessaria, he nostre Ecclesie eundem Dei Ser- 
monem predicant, eorundem Sacramentorum, di- 
vinitus institutorum, per eorundem ordinum Apos- 
tolicorum ministerium dispensatorum, participes sunt, 

1 In hac Latina interpretatione eorum capitulorum przecipué 
_delectum fecimus quz ad Ecclesiam Universalem attinere 
quodammodo videbantur. In Anglico autem archetypo Rela- 
tiones Delegationum (Reports of Committees), a Ccetu com- 
probate, plenariz reperiuntur. 

Latin Version of “Letter” of 1878. 193 

et Eundem Deum et Patrem venerantur, per Eundem 
Dominum Jesum Christum, in Eodem Spiritu Sancto 
super omnibus fidelibus effuso ad ducendos eos in 
omnem veritatem. 

Verim enimverd cum hac unitate consociata nun- 
quam non extitit ea consuetudinum, discipline et 
rituum varietas, que ab illa przrogativa enasci solet, 
quam quevis Ecclesia particularis, sive nationalis, 
jure sibi vindicat ; scilicet constituendi, immutandi, 
atque abrogandi czrimonias vel ritus Ecclesiasticos, 
humana tantum auctoritate ordinatos, modo omnia 
ad zdificationem fiant. 

Libenter quidem profitemur, nullam revera etiam- 
num sollicitudinis causam in hac diversitate reperiri. 
Constat autem, votum aliquorum animis nuper con- 
ceptum vocibus quoque passim significatum fuisse, 
hoc presertim intuitu, ut rationes quedam acte 
efficaces a nobis adhibeantur, ad occasiones discordim 
preecidendas, et ad illam genuinam et essentialeu 
unitatem, quz nostras Ecclesias indies supercres- 
centes complectitur, manifestandam amplius atque 

Primim quidem hujus concordie tuende illa in 
mentem venit ratio que inde ab Apostolis ipsis 
divinitis inspiratis originem ducens, Ecclesiis omni- 
bus in eddem individua et visibili unitate continendis 
diu inserviit. Hodierna autem rei Christiane ea est 
conditio, infausta quidem sed manifesta, ut Concilium 
vere CEcumenicum, ad quod Ecclesia Anglicana se 
paratam esse convenire semper professa est, convocari 
non possit. Difficultates quidem que impedimento 
sunt quominus Synodus ex omnibus Anglicanis Eccle- 
5115 conflata congregetur, re diversze et minus graves, 
nimize tamen nobis videntur, quam ut illa ratio unitatis 
conservandze a nobis commendetur. 

Aliud autem experimentum, secunda jam _ vice 
factum, congregatio scilicet Episcoporum ab Archi- 
episcopo Cantuariensi convocatorum, et Eo pre- 
sidente deliberantium spem saltem suppeditat, ques- 

194 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

tionem, quz hactenus insolubilis videbatur, rerum 
vicissitudine divinitus ordinata sponte solutum iri, ita 
ut Procuratores Ecclesiarum, situ et administratione 
diversarum, consultandi invicem causa, in unum 
coetum coalescant. 

Persuasum est nobis, ad unitatem in fide semel 
sanctis tradita proxime accedere divini cultis com- 
munionem, eamque societates Christianas firmissimo 
nexu copulare : et probe recordantes Librum Precum 
Communium, ab omnibus nostris Ecclesiis, aliqua- 
tenus variatum, retineri,et eximium unitatis vinculum 
extitisse, fratres nostros admonendos censemus, divini 
cultis communionem immoderatis rituum diversi- 
tatibus in discrimen posse adduci. Intrinsecam 
Ecclesiarum variarum unitatem custodiende earum 
concordiz adjumentum allaturam esse validissimum 
confidimus. Et dum libere profitemur, amplam 
quandam rituum Ecclesiasticorum flexibilitatem esse 
exoptandam, quippe que latum quasi campum pate- 
faciat legitimis piorum affectuum significationibus, 
nihilominus ad Apostolicum preceptum provocamus, 
“Omniaad edificationem fiant,” et ad illam Ecclesiz 
Catholice legem principalem, rectum ordinem com- 
mendantis atque obedientiam, etsi cum privatorum 
sensuum et propensionum abnegatione conjungantur, 
tanquam subsidia Christiane Unitatis fundamentalia, 
imo etiam ad fidem ipsam efficaciter conservandam 

Nolumus huic argumento finem imponere, quin 
spem nostram serio testificemur, omnes Ecclesize 
fideles agnituros fore, utcunque studiis in varia in- 
clinantes, universos oportere subjici, conscientiz ergo, 
in rebus ad ritus et cerimonias attinentibus, judiciis 
illis auctoritatem obtinentibus, que ab illa Ecclesia 
particulari vel nationali promulgata sint, sub cujus 
tutela, Dei providentia, sint constituti; et sibi sedulo 
temperaturos ab omni qualicunque alienationis 
vel exacerbationis occasione; et quotidie Deum 
enixé obsecraturos, ut omnia Ecclesia membra a 

Latin Version of “Letter” of 1878. 195 

Spiritu Sancto dirigantur ad quecunque recta sint 
excogitanda atque exequenda; et ut nos universi 
in illa fraterna dilectione, quz pacis est ipsissimum 
vinculum et omnium virtutum, adunare dignetur. 

* ΩΣ * * 

Gratias agimus Deo Omnipotenti maximas, ed quod 
protestationes solennes a tot Ecclesiis et societatibus 
Christianis per orbem terrarum profectz sint contra 
sedis Romanz usurpationes, et contra novicia dog- 
mata ejus auctoritate promulgata. 

Affectuum benevolorum significatio debetur ab 
Ecclesia Anglicana universis, sive Ecclesiis, sive 
singulis, contra hos errores protestantibus, quippe 
qui difficultatibus forsitan laborent specialibus, quum 
propter Incredulitatis incursiones, tum vero propter 
Romane sedis arrogantiam. 

Nos confitemur Unum tantum “ Mediatorem Dei 
et hominum, Hominem Jesum Christum,” “Qui est 
super omnia Deus in szcula.” Nos repudiamus, 
utpote Scripturis Sacris et Catholicze veritati ad- 
versantem, qualemcunque doctrinam alios mediatores 
Ejus vice constituentem, vel aliquatenus detrahentem 
ab Illius Divina Majestate, et a plenitudine Deitatis 
in Illo inhabitantis, que immaculato illo Sacrificio, 
semel ab Eo in Cruce propter omnium hominum 
peccata oblato, infinitum pretium impertita est. 

Commonendi igitur sunt a nobis fideles, facinus 
illud a Romano Episcopo patratum, in Concilio 
Vaticano, anno MDCCCLXX., quo sibi supereminentiam 
super omnes homines in rebus fidei et morum 
vindicavit, arrogate sibi Infallibilitatis prztextu, 
attributorum Ipsius Domini Nostri Jesu Christi 
manifestam fuisse invasionem. pee 

Innotuerunt omnibus regulz ille fundamentales, 
juxta quas Ecclesia Anglicana seipsam reformavit. 
Nos Sanctas Scripturas sufficientem et supremam 
fidei regulam esse declaramus, et omnibus nostris 
diligenter scrutandas proponimus. Nos fidem nostram 

196 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

ipsis Symbolorum antiquorum vocibus profitemur. 
Nos Apostolicum ordinem Episcoporum, Presbyte- 
rorum et Diaconorum retinemus. Ecclesiarum par- 
ticularium sive nationalium libertates legitimas 
asserimus. Nos Librum Communium Precationum, 
necnon Administrationis Sacramentorum, populis 
nostris in manus damus, vernaculo eorum sermone 
compositum, et juxta optima et antiquissima fidei 
et divini cultis exemplaria adornatum. Orbi uni- 
verso patefacta sunt hec nostra documenta ; sciuntur 
et leguntur ab omnibus. 

Libenter igitur amplectimur universos 5656. re- 
formandi studiosos ad amussim Ecclesie primitive. 
Rigidam Uniformitatem non flagitamus; superva- 
caneas dissensiones deprecamur. Omnibus ad nos 
allectis, dum jugum erroris et superstitionis excutere 
moliuntur, commodare operam nostrum parati sumus, 
et talia eis subministrare privilegia, qualia ipsis 
possint esse gratiosa, et nostris ipsorum institutis et 
formulis Ecclesiasticis consentanea. 

Ἂχ Χ x % 

Sed hec hactenus. Quod ad questiones attinet 
nobis propositas quz leges Matrimonii tangunt, dum 
ex animo agnoscimus angustias, ad quas nonnullz 
nostre Ecclesiz a popularium suorum legum latio- 
nibus redactz sunt, censemus quoque officium esse 
uniuscujusque Ecclesiz operam dare, ut sanctitati 
Matrimonii custodiendz consulatur, secundum man- 
data in Dei Verbo prescripta, et quemadmodum ab 
Ecclesia Christi hactenus sunt recepta. 

Rixas quasdam luctuosas de rituum Ecclesiasti- 
corum quzstionibus, considerantes, quibus nonnullz 
nostre congregationes graviter perturbate sunt nos 
affirmamus, nihil in diu usitata cerimoniarum con- 
suetudine, contra Episcopi admonitionem, debere 

Denique, nonnullas novitates, quum in agendo tum 
in docendo, quod ad Confessionem attinet, contem- 
plantes, nos declaramus Anglicanze Communionis 

Latin Version of “Letter” of 1878. 197 

Ecclesias firmiter eas leges tenere, que in hanc rem 
in Sacris Scripturis sunt promulgate, primitive 
Ecclesiz professione sancite, et ab Anglicana Refor- 
matione instaurate. Et nos consultO censemus, 
nulli Ecclesiz Ministro licere, ab iis, qui ad eum se 
recipiunt, doloris aperiendi gratia, omnium sigillatim 
peccatorum minutam enumerationem exquirere ; vel 
privatam confessionem iis imperare, ante Sacro- 
sancte Eucharistiz participationem; vel prezescri- 
bere, vel etiam commendare, confessionis consuetudi- 
nariz coram sacerdote exercitationem ; vel docere 
talem exercitationem, vel sacerdoti subjectionem, 
directionis, ut aiunt, causa, conditiones esse neces- 
sarias, ad sublimissimam vitam spiritualem attin- 
gendam. Nihilominus non in animo habemus quo- 
quam modo terminos imponere subsidiis, que in 
Libro nostro Precum Publicarum, ad conscientiarum 
sollicitarum sublevationem, provide subministrantur, 

Hz sunt determinationes questionum nobis pro- 
positarum, quatenus Ecclesiz Universalis vel Ec- 
clesiarum nostrarum conditionem attingere vide- 

Ad hec inspicienda varias Ecclesiarum Synodos, 
aliosque in eis Ecclesiis auctoritatem exercitantes, et 
universos denique Christi fideles, per orbem terrarum 
invitamus. Dominationem in cleris non affectamus : 
sed has determinationes, a coetu nostro approbatas, 
rationi et conscientiz fratrum nostrorum, utpote a 
Spiritu Sancto illuminatorum, commendamus, enixé 
Deum apprecantes, ut omnes ubique gentium Domini 
Nostri Jesu Christi Nomen invocantes, unaé mente 
consocientur, in und Communione conjungantur, 
unam fidem semel sanctis traditam firmiter com- 
plectantur, et unum Suum Dominum in uno puritatis 
et dilectionis spiritu venerentur.. Amen. 

Subscripsi, in nomine Ccetis Lambethani, 

Archiepiscopus Cantuariensis, 

198 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 


Ἔν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ συνηθροισμένων, ἐν Παλατίῳ Λαμβηθανῷ, μηνὶ 
᾿Ιουλίῳ, ἔτει awon (1878). 

Τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ χαίρειν ἐν Κυρίῳ. 

Ἡμεῖς ᾿ἀρχιεπίσκοποι, Μητροπολῖται, καὶ ἄλλοι, 
ἐπίσκοποι τῆς ἁγίας Καθολικῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας, συγκοινω- 
νοῦντες ὁλοκλήρως τῇ ᾿Αγγλικανῇ ᾿Εκκλησίᾳ, ἑκατὸν 
ὄντες τὸν ἀριθμὸν, ἅπαντες ἐπισκοπὴν παροικιῶν 
ἐπιτηδεύοντες, ἢ νομίμως ἐπισκοπικὰ τέλη ἐν αὐταῖς 
ἐπιτετραμμένοι, συνελθόντες, πολλοὶ ἐξ ἡμῶν ἀπὸ τῶν 
μακροτάτων τῆς οἰκουμένης κλιμάτων, ἐν τῷ Παλατίῳ 
“Δαμβηθανῷ, ἔτει τῆς τοῦ Κυρίου ἐνσαρκώσεως awor 
(1878), προεδρεύοντος σεβασμιωτάτου᾽ Αρχιβάλδου 
Κάμπβελλ, τῇ θείᾳ προνοίᾳ ᾿Αρχιεπισκόπου 
Καντουαρίας,᾿ Επισκόπων ὅλης ᾿Αγγλίας πρωτο- 
θρόνου, μετειληφότες, ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ εἰρημένου παλατίου, 
τῶν ἁγίων μυστηρίων τοῦ σώματος καὶ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ 
Κυρίου, καὶ προσευχαῖς ἡνωμένοι ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ ἁγίου 
Πνεύματος χειραγωγίας, ἐξέτασιν πεποιήκαμεν διαφόρων 
ζητημάτων ἡμῖν προβεβλημένων, ἀνηκόντων εἰς τὴν τῆς 
᾿Εκκλησίας σχέσιν ἐν διαφόροις τοῦ κόσμου μέρεσιν. 

Περὶ τούτων τῶν ζητημάτων σπουδαίως διὰ πλειόνων 
ἡμερῶν συμβεβουλευκότες, παρατιθέμεθα τανῦν τοῖς 
πιστοῖς τὰ συμπεράσματα ἡμῖν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν δεδογμένα." 

᾿Ενθυμούμενοι τὴν ἐπιτηδειοτάτην μέθοδον πρὸς τὴν 
τήρησιν τῆς ἑνότητος τῶν διαφόρων τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινω- 
νίας ἐκκλησιῶν, πρώτιστα πάντων ἀναγνωρίζομεν, μετ᾽ 
ἐγκαρδίου εὐχαριστίας τῷ Παντοκράτορι Θεῷ, Tipe 
οὐσιώδη καὶ ἐναργῆ ἑνότητα, ἐν ἣ ἡ ᾿ἀγγλικανὴ ᾿Εκκλη- 


a ΄ , a λ , 2X \ 

Ev ταύτῃ τῇ petadpace, τῶν κεφαλαίων ἐκλογὴν πεποι- 
ἤκαμεν, τῶν μάλιστα τῇ καθόλου ᾿Εἰκκλησίᾳ προσηκόντων" ἐν 
δὲ τῷ ᾿Αγγλικῷ τῆς ᾿Επιστολῆς ἀρχετύπῳ ai τῶν ἐπιτροπῶι τοῦ 

/ > 4 ᾿ > ας a 
συμβουλίου ἐκθέσεις (Reports of Committees), ἀπὸ τοῦ Sup- 
βουλίου δοκιμασθεῖσαι, ὁλοτελεῖς εὑρίσκονται. 

Greck Version of “Letter” of 1878. 199 

σία, καὶ ai ἐκκλησίαι μετ᾽ αὐτῆς OpaTas συγκοινωνούσαι, 
διατελοῦσι συνημμένα. ‘Hvwpévar ὑπὸ μιᾶς θείας 
Κεφαλῆς, ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἐν τῇ κοινωνίᾳ τῆς μιᾶς 
Καθολικῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας, κατέχουσαν τὴν μίαν πίστιν, 
ἐν ταῖς αγίαις Γραφαῖς ἀποκεκαλυμμένην, ἐν τοῖς Συμ- 
βόλοις ὡρισμένην, καὶ ὑπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆθεν ᾿Εκκλησίας 
κεκρατημένην, δεχόμεναι τὰς αὐτὰς κανονικὰς Γραφὰς 
τῆς παλαιᾶς καὶ τῆς καινῆς Διαθήκης, ὡς τὰ πάντα πρὸς 
σωτηρίαν ἀναγκαῖα περιεχούσας, αὗται αἱ ἡμέτεραι 
᾿Εκκλησίαι τὸν αὐτὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ λόγον κηρύσσουσι, τῶν 
αὐτῶν θεόθεν διατεταγμένων μυστηρίων μεταλαμβάνουσι 
διὰ τῆς ὑπηρεσίας τῶν αὐτῶν ἀποστολικῶν βαθμῶν, καὶ 
προσκυνοῦσι τῷ αὐτῷ Θεῷ καὶ Πατέρι, διὰ τοῦ αὐτοῦ 
Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ ἁγίῳ καὶ θείῳ 
I νεύματι; πᾶσι τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἐπιχορηγουμένῳ » πρὸς 
τὸ ὁδηγεῖν αὐτοὺς εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν. 

; “μέσως μὲν οὖν μετὰ ταύτης τῆς ἑνότητος, ὑπῆρξεν 
ἐν ἡμετέραις ἐκκλησίαις ἐκείνη συνηθείας, διατάξεως, 
καὶ λειτουργίας διαφορὰ, ἥτις ἀναγκαίως ἐκφύεται ἐξ 
ἀσκήσεως τῆς ἐξουσίας, τῆς ἑκάστῃ μερικῇ ἢ ἐθνικῇ 
ἐκκλησίᾳ προσηκούσης, τοῦ διατάσσειν, παραχαράσσειν, 
καὶ ἀκυροῦν θεσμοὺς καὶ τελετὰς ἐκκλησιαστικὰς, ὑπ᾽ 
ἀνθρωπίνης ἐξουσίας διατεταγμένας, μόνον ὥστε πάντα 
πρὸς οἰκοδομὴν γίγνεσθαι. 

᾿Ασμένως μὲν ὁμολογοῦμεν μηδεμίαν εἰσέτι εὑρί- 
σκεσθαι μερίμνης αἰτίαν, διὰ ταύτην τὴν διαφωνίαν. 
Ὅμως μέντοι ἐπυπόθησίς τις νεωστὶ ἐπιπολὺ αἰσθήσει 
καὶ λόγῳ πεφανέρωται, ὡς ἐννοητέα καὶ πρροσαπτέα εἴη 
ὄργανά τινα, πρὸς τὸ ἐκκόπτειν, εἰ τύχοι, ἀφορμὰς 
διχοστασίας, καὶ πρὸς τὴν λαμπροτέραν ἀπόδειξιν καὶ 
αὔξησιν τῆς ἀληθινῆς καὶ οὐσιώδους ὁμονοίας ἐν ἡμε- 
τέραις ἐκκλησίαις ὑπαρχούσης. 

Τὸ πρῶτον μὲν εἰς νοῦν ἀνερχόμενον ὄργανον τοιαύτης 
ἑνώσεως εὐλόγως ἂν εἴη ἐκεῖνο, ὅπερ, ἀρχὴν ἔχον ἀπὸ 
τῶν θεοφόρων ἀποστόλων, συνέζευξεν ἁπάσας τὰς 
Χριστοῦ ἐκκλησίας ἐν μιᾷ ἀδιαιρέτῳ καὶ ὁρατῇ κοινωνίᾳ. 
᾿Αλλὰ μὲν οὖν ἡ συνάθροισις ἀληθινῶς οἰκουμενικῆς 
Συνόδου, πρὸς ὁποίαν ἡ ᾿Αγγλικανὴ ᾿Εκκλησία πάντοτε 
ἐπηγγέλλετο ἑτοίμη εἶναι συνέρχεσθαι, ἐν τῇ σημερινῇ 

200 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

τοῦ Χριστιανισμοῦ καταστάσει, δυστυχῶς μὲν, ἄχλα 
φανερῶς, πέφυκεν ἀμήχανος. Αἱ μὲν ἀπορίαι, αἵτινες 
παρακολουθήσειαν ἂν τῇ συνελεύσει συνόδου ἐκ πασῶν 
τῶν ἀγγλικανῶν ἐκκλησιῶν συγκεκροτημένης, καίπερ 
ἀνόμοιοι καὶ μετριώτεραι τῶν εἰρημένων, ὅμως μέντοι 

εἶ Ἃ “Ὁ 7 a > 
εἰσὶ βαρύτεραι ἢ συγχωρῆσαι ταύτης τῆς μεθόδου, ἐν 
τῷ νῦν χρόνῳ, συναίνεσιν. ᾿Αλλ᾽ ἡ πεῖρα, δὶς γεγονυῖα, 
συμβουλίου ἐπισκόπων, ἀπὸ τοῦ Καντουαρίας ᾿άρχι- 
ἐπισκόπου συγκεκλημένων, καὶ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ προεδρεύοντος 
συνηθροισμένων, ἐλπίδα ἡμῖν παρέχει αὐτομάτου λύσεως 
προβλήματος μέχρι τοῦ νῦν ἀλύτου, δηλονότι συν- 
αθροίσεως καὶ συμβουλεύσεως τοποτηρητῶν ἐκκλησιῶν 
τῇ τε θέσει καὶ τῇ διοικήσει διαφερουσῶν. 

᾿Εγγύτατα μετὰ τὴν ἑνότητα ἐν τῇ πίστει, τῇ τοῖς 
ἁγίοις ἅπαξ παραδοθείσῃ, πεπεισμένοι ἐσμὲν τὴν 
θρησκείας κοινωνίαν ἰσχυρότατον εἶναι σύνδεσμον 
πρὸς τὴν σύναψιν τῶν χριστιανικῶν ἑταιριῶν' καὶ 
καλῶς μεμνημένοι OTL τὸ ἡμέτερον τῶν δημοσίων 
προσευχῶν βιβλίον, μετά τινων οἵων δήποτε ἀλλοιώσεων 
ἐν πάσαις ἡμετέραις ἐκκλησίαις κατεχόμενον, ἐξαίρετόν 
τι ἑνότητος γέγονε φυλακτήριον, νουθετεῖν ἀξιοῦμεν τοὺς 
ἡμεδαποὺς, ὅτι αὕτη ἡ θρησκείας κοινωνία κινδυνεύοι 
ἂν λυμαίνεσθαι δι’ ὑπερβολικῶν ἱερουργίας παραλλάξεων. 
Ἡ ἐσωτερικὴ μὲν τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ἑνότης ταύτῃ τῇ 
θρησκείας κοινωνίᾳ, καθὼς πεποίθαμεν, ὑπηρετήσει: 
ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως, (καίπερ ἐννοοῦντες ὅτι τοία τις ἀμφιλαφὴς 
λειτουργικῶν τελετῶν ἐλευθερία αἱρετή ἐστιν, οἵα 
πάσαις ταῖς νομίμαις θρησκευτικῶν αἰσθημάτων ἀπο- 
δείξεσιν εὐρυχωρίαν ἂν χαρίσαιτο.) τὴν ἀποστολικὴν 
παραγγελίαν ἐπικαλούμεθα, ““πάντα πρὸς οἰκοδομὴν 
γιγνέσθω," καὶ τὸν καθολικὸν κανόνα ἐπιμαρτυρόμεθα, 
τὸν διορίζοντα εὐταξίαν καὶ πειθαρχίαν, καίπερ μετ᾽ 
αὐταπαρνήσεως ἰδίων προσκλίσεων καὶ αἰσθήσεων 
ἀποδιδομένας, ὡς χριστιανικῆς ἑνότητος θεμέλια, καὶ ὡς 
ἀναγκαίας πρὸς αὐτῆς τῆς πίστεως νικηφόρον ὕὑπερ- 
ἄσπισιν. Τουγαροῦν οὐ παυσόμεθα τοιαῦτα νουθε- 
τοῦντες πρὶν ἐκφωνῆσαι ἐκτενῶς τὴν ἐλπίδα, ὅτι πάντα 
τῶν ἡμετέρων ἐκκλησιῶν τέκνα, ὁποίαις τισὶν οὖν θεω- 
pias διαφέροντα, μέλλουσιν ὁμολογεῖν τὸ καθῆκον τοῦ 

Greek Version of “ Letter” of 1878. 201 

ὑποτάσσεσθαι, Sia τὴν συνείδησιν, ἐν θεσμοῖς καὶ 
τελεταῖς θρησκευτικαῖς, ταῖς ἐξουσιαστικαῖς κρίσεσιν τῆς 
μερικῆς ἢ ἐθνικῆς ἐκκλησίας, ὑφ᾽ ἧς θείᾳ προνοίᾳ τυγχά- 
νωσι κατῳκισμένα" καὶ ὅτι ἀφέξονται παντὸς πράώγματυς 
εἰς ἀλλοτρίωσιν ἢ ἐρεθισμὸν τείνοντος, καὶ ὁσήμερον 
θερμῶς προσεύξονται, ἵ ἵνα τὸ ἅγιον Πνεῦμα πάντα τῆς 
ἐκκλησίας μέλη ὁδηγῇ εἰς τὸ λογίζεσθαι καὶ ἐργάζεσθαι 
πάντοτε ἃ δεῖ, καὶ ἡμᾶς πάντας συνώπτῃ τῇ φιλαδελ- 
φικῇ ἐκείνῃ ἀγάπῃ, ἥτις ἐστὶν αὐτὸς εἰρήνης καὶ πασῶν 
ἀρετῶν σύνδεσμος. 
* * x * 

Εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ Παντοκράτορι. Θεῷ, OTL σεμνο- 
πρεπής τίς διαμαρτυρία ἐξήχηται ἀπὸ πάνυ πολλῶν 
ἐκκλησιῶν, καὶ ἀπὸ κοινοτήτων χριστιανῶν καθ᾽ ὅλον 
τὸν κόσμον, κατὰ τῶν τῆς Ρωμαίας καθέδρας πλεονεκτη- 
μάτων, καὶ κατὰ τῶν νεωτερικῶν δογμάτων, ὑπ᾽ ἐξουσίας 
αὐτῆς διωρισμένων. 

Ἢ γγλικανὴ ᾿Εκκλησία ὀφείλει πᾶσαν συμπάθειαν 
ἐκκλησίαις κοινῇ, καὶ χριστιανοῖς ἰδίᾳ, διαμαρτυρομένοις 
κατὰ τούτων πλανημάτων, καὶ στενοχωρουμένοις, εἰ τύ- 
χοι, ὑπ᾽ ἀποριῶν ἐξάλλων, διὰ τῶν τῆς ἀπιστίας προσ- 
βολῶν, ἅμα καὶ διὰ τῶν τῆς Ῥώμης ἐπιχειρημάτων. 

Ἡμεῖς ὁμολογοῦμεν ἕνα μόνον Μεσίτην θεοῦ καὶ 
ἀνθρώπων, “AvOpwrov ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστὸν, ὅς ἐστιν ἐπὶ 
πάντων Θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. ᾿πωθούμεθα, 
ὡς ἐναντίον ταῖς Γραφαῖς καὶ τῇ καθολικῇ ἀληθείᾳ, πᾶν 
ὁτιοῦν δόγμα, ὅπερ καθιστάναι ἄλλους μεσίτας ἀντ᾽ 
᾿Εκείνου τολμήσειεν ἂν, ἢ ἀφαιρεῖν ὁτιοῦν ἀπὸ τῆς 
θείας μεγαλειότητος τοῦ πληρώματος τῆς θεότητος ἐν 
Αὐτῷ κατοικοῦντος, καὶ τιμὴν ἄπειρον παρέχοντος τῇ 
ἀμώμῳ ἐκεινῃ θυσίᾳ, τῇ “ἅπαξ ὑ ὑπ᾽ Αὐτοῦ ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὅλου 
τοῦ κόσμου ἁμαρτιῶν ἐπὶ σταυροῦ προσενεχθείσης. 

“Χρεωστοῦμεν οὗν νουθετεῖν τοὺς πιστοὺς, τὸ ἔργον 6 
κατείργασται ὁ τῆς “Ρώμης ἐπίσκοπος ἔτει 1870 ἐν τῇ 
Βατικανῇ συνόδῳ, δι᾽ οὗ ὑπεροχῆς ἀντεποιήσατο ὑπερ 
πάντων ἀνθρώπων, τήν τε πίστιν καὶ τὰ ἤθη, ἐπὶ προ- 
σχήματι ἀπλανησίας ἑαυτῷ ἐφαρπασθείσης, ἐπέμβασι:' 
γεγονέναι τῶν ἀξιωμάτων τῷ Κυρίῳ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστῷ 


202 Lambeth Conference of 1868. 

Γνώριμοι πᾶσίν εἰσιν οἱ κανόνες, καθ᾽ ods ἡ Δ γγλικανὴ 
᾿Εκκλησία ἑαυτὴν μετερρύθμισεν. ᾿ἀνακηρύττομεν τὴν 
αὐτάρκειαν καὶ τὴν ὑπεροχὴν τῶν ἱερῶν Tr ραφῶν, ὡς 
ὁριστικὴν πίστεως στάθμην, καὶ τῷ ἡμετέρῳ λαῷ παρ- 
αγγέλλομεν σπουδαίαν αὐτῶν μελέτην' τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν 
ταῖς τῶν ἀρχαίων Συμβόλων φωναῖς ὁμολογοῦμεν" τὸ ἀπο- 
στολικὸν τάγμα Επισκόπων, Πρεσβυτέρων καὶ διακόνων 
κατέχομεν" τὴν ἔννομον ἐλευθερίαν μερικῶν ἢ ἐθνικῶν 
ἐκκλησιῶν διαβεβαιούμεθα' τῷ λαῷ ἡμῶν ἐγχειρίζομεν, 
ἐν τῇ ἐγχωρίῳ αὐτοῦ διαλέκτῳ, βιβλίον προσευχῶν δη- 
μοσίων καὶ τελετῶν, καὶ τῶν μυστηρίων ἱερουργίας, κατὰ 
τὰ ἄριστα καὶ παλαιότατα χριστιανικῆς πίστεως καὶ 
λατρείας ἀρχέτυπα. 

Ταῦτα τὰ ἡμῶν μαρτυρήματα ἐνώπιον τῆς οἰκουμένης 
ἀναπτύσσεται, γυγνωσκόμενα καὶ ἀναγυγνωσκόμενα ὑπὸ 
πάντων ἀνθρώπων. 

Acpévas οὖν ἀσπαζόμεθα πᾶσαν πεῖραν μεταρρυθμί- 
σεως κατὰ τὸ παράδειγμω τῆς ἀρχαίας ἐκκλησίας" στε- 
ρεὰν ταὐτότητα οὐκ ἀπαιτοῦμεν: ἀνωφελεῖς διχοστασία 
παραιτούμεθα' πᾶσιν τοῖς πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἐφελκομένοις ἐν 
τῷ ἐπιχειρεῖν ἑαυτοὺς ἐλευθερῶσαι ἀπὸ ζυγοῦ πλάνης 
καὶ δεισιδαιμονίας πᾶσαν βοήθειαν προθύμως προτεί- 
νομεν, καὶ οἷα ἑαυτοῖς περονόμια εἴη ἀρεστὰ, καὶ ἡμετέροις 
κανόσιν, τοῖς ἐν ἡμετέραις διατυπώσεσιν ὡρισμένοις, σύμ- 
φωνα, ἐθελόντως προκομίζομεν. 

* ἧς κ 

Περὶ τῶν ζητημάτων ἡμῖν παρατεθέντων ὑπὲρ τῶν 
τοῦ Γάμου νόμων ἐμφανίζομεν, ὅτι τὰς ἀπορίας ἐπυγυγνώ- 
σκοντες, εν αἷς ἔνιαι ἐκκλησίαι ἐμπλέκονται, διὰ τῶν 
θεσμῶν της τοπικῆς νομοθεσίας, νομίζομεν ὅτι δεῖ πᾶσαν 
ἐκκλησίαν, κατὰ τὴν ἑαυτῆς γνώμην, τὴν τοῦ Γάμου 
ἁγιωσύνην διαφυλάττειν, κατὰ τὰ ἐν τῷ ῥήματι τοῦ 
Θεοῦ ὁρισθέντα, καὶ καθὰ ἡ τοῦ Χριστοῦ “Ἐκκλησία 
μέχρι τοῦ νῦν ταῦτα δέδεκται. 

Ἀναθεωροῦντες τοὺς λυγροὺς διαλογισμοὺς, περὶ τελε- 
τῶν ἐκκλησιαστικῶν, δι’ ὧν ἔνια τῶν ἡμετέρων πλήθη 
χαλεπῶς τεθορύβηνται, διαβεβαιούμεθα τὸν κανόνα, ὁρί- 
tovra μηδὲν δεῖν νεωτερίζειν, ἐν τῇ εἰθισμένῃ θρησκείας 
διατάξει, κατὰ τῆς τοῦ ἐπισκόπου νουθεσίας. 

Greek Version of “ Letter” of 1878. 203 

“οιπὸν ἐνθυμούμενοι καινοτομίας τινὰς, τῇ τε πράξει 
καὶ τῇ διδαχῇ, περὶ τῆς ἐξομολογήσεως, διϊσχυριξόμεθα, 
τὰς τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας ᾿Εκκλησίας κρατεῖν. βε- 
βαίως τοὺς κανόνας περὶ τῆς ἐξομολογήσεως ἐν ταῖς 
ἁγίαις Γραφαῖς ἀποδεδευγμένους, καὶ ὑπὸ τῆς ἀρχαίας 
᾿Εκκλησίας συνωμολογημένους, καὶ ἐν τῇ ᾿Αγγλικῇ Με- 
ταρρυθμίσει᾽ ἀνακεκαινωμένους" καὶ ἐσκεμμένως ἐγνώ- 
Kaper, μ μηδενὶ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ὑπηρέτῃ ἐξεῖναι ἀπαιτεῖν 
ἐκ τῶν πρὸς αὑτὸν φοιτώντων, διὰ τὴν τῆς αὐτῶν λύπης 
ἀνάπτυξιν, ἁπασῶν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν κατὰ μέρος ἑκάστων 
ἐξαρίθμησιν, ἢ ἢ ἰδίαν ἐξομολόγησιν ἐκβασανίζξειν, πρὸ τῆς. 
ἁγίας εὐχαριστίας μεταλήψεως, ἢ ἐπιτάσσειν ἢ καὶ 
παραινεῖν τὴν τῆς συνήθους τῷ ἱερεῖ ἐξομολογήσεως 
ἐπιτήδευσιν, ἢ ἢ διδάσκειν ὅ ὅτι τοία ἐπιτήδευσις, ἢ ἢ τὸ ὑπο- 
τάσσεσθαι τῇ οὑτωσὶ καλουμένῃ. ἱερέως “ειραγωγίᾳ, 
ἀναγκαῖά ἐστι προπαιδεύματα πρὸς τὴν τῆς ἀνωτάτης 
πνευματ τικῆς ζωῆς ἐπίβασιν. “Ὅμως μέντοι οὐδαμῶς 
ἐννοοῦμεν ἐπιτέμνειν τὴν ἐν τῇ βίβλῳ τῶν δημοσίων 

προσευχῶν, πρὸς τὸν βεβαρημένων συνειδήσεων ἐπι- 
κουφισμὸν, ἐπιχορηγίαν προνενοημένην.. 

Ταῦτά ἐστι τὰ συμπεράσματα εἰς ἃ κατηντήκαμεν, 
περὶ τῶν ἡμῖν προβεβλημένων ζητημάτων, ἐν οἷς τὰ 
πάντων τῆς Καθολικῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας τέκνων ἁπτόμενα 
ταῖς συνόδοις ἐκκλησιῶν, καὶ ταῖς ἐξουσίαις καθ᾽ € ἑκάστην 
κυβερνητικαῖς, καὶ πᾶσιν ἁπλῶς τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ 
Ἰησοῦ φιλοφρόνως σαφηνίξομεν. 

Οὐκ ἀντιποιούμεθα τοῦ κατακυριεύειν ἐν κλήροις, 
ἀλλὰ ταῦτα τῷ ἡμετέρῳ. συμβουλίῳ ἀ ἀρέσαντα συνίστα- 
μεν τῷ λογισμῷ καὶ τῇ συνειδήσει τῶν ἀδελφῶν, ὡς 
ὑπὸ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος πεφωτισμένων, ἐκτενῶς Θεῷ 
προσευχόμενοι, ἵνα πάντες οἱ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Κυρίου ἐ emt 
καλούμενοι, μιᾷ γνώμῃ καὶ μιῷ κοινωνίᾳ ἡνωμένοι, τὴν 
πίστιν τὴν ἅπαξ τοῖς ἁγίοις παραδοθεῖσαν βεβαίως κρα- 
τῶσιν, καὶ τῷ ἑνὶ αὐτῶν Κυρίῳ ἐν ἑνὶ ἀφθαρσίας καὶ 
ἀγάπης bh sar λατρεύωσιν. μήν. 

Ὑπέγραψα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ συμβουλίου, 
‘O Καντουαρίας ᾿Αρχιεπίσκοπος. 

O 2 

204 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

No. XXIII. (See page 26.) 










THE BisHopP oF 51. ALBAN’S. 












THE BisHop oF Down. 
THE BisHor OF Ossory. 

Official List of Bishops Present, 1878. 













Moray. Primus. 


New YorK. 





















MONTREAL, JZetropolitan. 








SYDNEY. AZetropolitan. 









Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

OF CHRISTCHURCH. Metropolitan. 




OF RUPERTSLAND. AJZetropolitan. 




Officers of {He Conference. 


THE BISHOP OF EDINBURGH, Secretary of Committees. 

ISAMBARD BRUNEL, D.C.L., (Chancellor of the Diocese of Ely, 
Asststant Secretary. 

No. XXIV. (Sce page 20.) 

Order of Bishops tn the Processions at Lambeth Palace 
and in St. Paul’s Cathedral in 1878. 

The following is an official list, as prepared for the 
Processions on July 2 and July 27, 1878. The order 
had to be materially changed on the occasion of the 
actual services, by the absence, at the moment, of 

Order of the Bishops in Processions. 207 

Bishops who had been expected, but the same prin- 
ciple of arrangement was in each case followed. The 
Archbishop of Canterbury had the Archbishop of 
York and the Bishop of London on his right and 
left hand, and was preceded by the Metropolitans of 
the Irish, Scottish, and Colonial Provinces. The 
Bishops from the United States walked, as guests, 
abreast of the English Diocesans. The other Bishops 
were arranged, two and two, according to date of 
consecration. The processions moved, as usual, in 
reverse order, the junior Bishops first, the Arch- 
bishops last. 

Archbishop of York. Archbishop of Canterbury. Bishop of London. 

- Armagh. 
Bishop of Delaware. Primus of Scottish ἮΝ Winchester. 
Episcopal Church. 
‘a New York. _ Bishop of Sydney. wi Llandaff. 
δ Ohio. Ἢ Christchurch, fe Ripon. 
New Zealand. 
ὥ Pennsylvania. Montreal. Re Bangor. 
je Western New Capetown. :,  f Gloucester ἃ 
York. \ Bristol. 
Nebraska. Rupert’s Land. Chester. 
Bishop of Pittsburgh. Bishop ot St. Alban’s. 
oe Louisiana, "" Hereford. 
a Missouri. δὰ Peterborough. 
- Long Island. ἣν Lincoln. 
"ὦ Albany. <a Salisbury. 
Central Pennsylvania. ἣν Carlisle. 
Assistant Bishop of North Carolina. ai Exeter. 
Bishop of New Jersey. FY Bath and Wells. 
a Wisconsin. oe Oxford. 
τ Towa. m Manchester. 
$3 Colorado. Τὰ Chichester. 
e St. Asaph. a Ely. 
ie St. David’s. Ῥ Rochester. 
ts Truro. “ Lichfield. 
ἐν, Sodor and Man. ae Dover. 
Guildford. fe Nottingham. 
Bishop Perry. Killaloe. 
»» M*‘Dougall. Bishop Ryan. 
Bishop of Meath. », Claughton. 

And the other Bishops according to their date of consecration. 

208 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

No. XXV. (Sce page 33.) . 

Sermon preached by Bishop Stevens, of Pennsylvania, 
wn St. Paul’s Cathedral, on Saturday, july 
27th, 1878. 

“ And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men 
unto Me.”— Sz. Joh xii. 32. 

Most Rev. Fathers and Brethren Beloved— 

It is with unfeigned diffidence that I stand before 
you this morning. 

Deeply as I appreciate the honour of having been 
selected as your preacher, still more deeply am I 
burdened with a sense of the responsibility which 
rests upon me as your mouthpiece on this great 
occasion. Not that 1 am commissioned to speak 
your views, or declare what we have said or done, 
but I am your mouthpiece as guiding your thoughts 
in this closing hour, and summing them up in words 
appropriate to the valedictory of this remarkable 
Conference. May the Holy Ghost so illumine my 
mind that I may think only those things which are 
right, and so touch my lips that I shall speak only 
that which shall be for the glory of the Triune 
God ! 

I shall not attempt to review the doings of the 
Conference now brought to an end. Within this 
present month, and within the Library of Lambeth 
Palace, has been made a history, the record of which 
will constitute one of the most illuminated chapters 
in the annals of the Holy Catholic Church. Never 
before have so many English-speaking Bishops met 
together. Never before have all branches of the 

Serion of the Bishop of Pennsylvania, 209 

Anglican Communion been so fully represented in 
an ecclesiastical assembly. Such a gathering con- 
verges to itself the eyes of the thinking world, and 
such a gathering must radiate from itself a power for 
weal or woe that shall reach to far-distant ages. The 
history of that Conference is made. The result of 
that Confererice will be fully known only when the 
record of eternity shall be revealed. We met as 
standard-bearers of the Cross of Christ. That fact 
has been the prominent one in all our deliberations, 
and we separate to go back to our dioceses, more 
impressed than ever that it is in and through an 
uplifted Christ—faithfully held up and fully dis- 
played, that our work can be accomplished, and all 
men—men of all races, all climes, all countries—be 
drawn to the feet of the Crucified and to the Church, 
which is His Body. In this precious truth we have 
found not only a bond of personal union, but of real 
unity throughout the wide-spreading branches of our 
Holy Church. 

Our little diversities, personal and national, as to 
non-essentials of faith and the accessories of worship, 
look very small before the great essentials in which 
we all agree. We feel that we all rest on the same 
corner and foundation stones laid in Zion, even 
Christ and His Apostles, and the eternal and distinc- 
tive verities of faith revealed in God’s Holy Word. 

This sacred depositum intrusted to the Church as 
the keeper and witness of the faith once delivered 
to the saints, embodied in the creeds of Christendom, 
endorsed by the undisputed General Councils, and 
maintained and defended by the consensus of the 
undivided Church in the writings of the early 
Fathers, is the blessed heritage of us all, and binds 
us together in the oneness and unity of a living 
organism, operating through diverse members and 
by diverse functions, yet all holding to the one 
Divine Head—nourished by the one Divine Blood, 
breathing the one Divine Breath of Life. 

210 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

Another fact, which has grown out of the more 
faithful lifting up of the Lord Jesus Christ, and 
which this Conference has brought prominently out, 
is the increase of spiritual life and work in all the 
branches of the Anglican Church. The reports of 
the Bishops from every quarter testify to this 
pleasing fact. Not only is this increase seen in 
a more widely-spread and deeper-toned personal 
piety, but also in the gratifying increase of reverence 
for holy things and places, in the more life-inspiring 
renderings of our beautiful Liturgy, in the more 
frequent celebrations of the Holy Communion, and 
in the multifarious forms of Church work springing 
up in all our dioceses and missionary jurisdictions. 

It is further seen in the bringing into effective and 
judicious use agencies for the cultivation of personal 
holiness, and the better reaching of the sick and the 
poor, and for the wider extension of Church privi- 
leges, which have either never been used before, or 
which have long been disused, because abused to 
purposes of superstition and error. We feel, and 
I think rightly, that whatever has been done or used 
in other ages, or by other communions, which has 
been productive of good, even though tainted with 
the evils of the age, or the communion using them, 
ought not on that account to be set aside; but 
rather should be reclaimed from wrong-doing, and 
by wise and authoritative adaptation be made to 
serve the right and the true in faith and worship. 
Hence implements of spiritual tillage, hitherto neg- 
lected or suspected, have been remodelled and rightly 

Methods of Church work, which were once looked 
upon with distrust, have been prudently adjusted to 
our own needs and times. Our Blessed Lord gave 
to His Church that same power of self-adjustment 
which in a higher and holier way He showed in His 
own conduct when on earth. He gave it marvellous 
flexibility of circumference, combined with central 

Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 211 

fixedness and unchangeableness—flexibility, so as 
to conform to all the outlines of human needs, just 
as He has made the great ocean to flow as readily 
into the little cove beside the fisherman’s hut as into 
the magnificent bays which harbour the navies of the 
world ; and fixedness, so that the substantial body 
of truth shall never be changed, just as He holds the 
same great ocean in the hollow of His Hand. The 
multiplied agencies which the Church has set in 
motion in the last half-century illustrate what I mean 
as to adjustment of the Church to the demands of 
modern society. 

Specially I may mention the introduction of lay- 
helpers, both men and women, into the active service 
of the Church. The fact proves that the Church is. 
reviving from her languid state, when it was too 
much the fashion to regard the clergy as the Church, 
and rather to frown upon lay effort as trenching upon 
clerical prerogative. It was this spirit which lost to 
the Church of England the fruit of that great 
uprising of zeal under the Wesleys and Whitfield, 
which, had it been recognised and utilised, and 
taught to work in Churchly channels, as it now 
would be, would have rooted the Church of England 
tenfold more in the hearts of the toiling classes, and 
kept them from drifting away into fragmentary 
divisions; would have welded together social 
elements which would admirably supplement each 
other ; and would have made the disestablishment 
and denationalisation of the Church of England 
utterly impossible. 

The introduction of the lay element into the 
councils of the Church, whether diocesan or Convoca- 
tional, is a grave question, because, in some cases, 
encumbered with serious difficulties. Therefore each 
national Church must deal with it as a national 
question, and settle it as shall best subserve its 
national interests. But the patent fact is, that the 
bringing in of the laity as a constituent part of the 

212 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

various working assemblies of the Church has in the 
United States and in many of the Colonial provinces 
and dioceses been of the highest value to the cause of 
our holy faith. Intrust the laity with responsibility, 
and you secure their confidence. Make them a part 
of your deliberate counsels, and they will educate 
themselves to discharge aright the duties of their 
position. Let them realise that the Church leans 
upon their wisdom as well as upon their purse, and 
they will show that strong common sense, knowledge, 
and discretion which shall make them as powerful 
allies in Church legislation as they now are in Church 

It is true that with this increase of vitality has 
been an increase of abnormal life, running out into 
excesses, both in doctrine and in ritual. In a 
Church made up of imperfect beings, with all possible 
tastes, temperaments, and idiosyncrasies, such evils 
cannot well be avoided. Our Blessed Lord told us 
in His parables that this would be the case. St. 
Paul distinctly declared to the Corinthians that 
“there must be also heresies among you, that they 
which are approved may be made manifest among 
you,” thus not merely recognizing in His day, and in 
Apostolic Churches, the existence of this Church life 
running out into wrong channels of thought and 
action, but giving as a reason for its permissive 
existence, that the Lord used these heresies and 
these sects as a means of testing and manifesting the 
true,—making the true more clearly true by placing 
alongside of it its stimulating error. 

Nor has the Church of Christ ever been free from 
these errors, and the words of our Lord in the parable 
of the Tares and Wheat, “Let both grow together 
until the harvest,” and then saying that that harvest 
was the end of the world, indicates with certainty 
that these heresies, and this schismatic spirit, will 
continue the earthly lifetime of the Church. 
Lamentable indeed are these displays, splitting off 

Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 213 

from the Church into open schism, on the one hand, 
or raising up factions, turbulent and menacing, 
within the bounds of the Church, on the other. 

These evils can only be partially held in check 
or corrected by any legal or technical decisions of 
civil or ecclesiastical courts, for in some instances 
they have fostered more scandals than they have 
allayed. The real remedy lies in another direction. 
It is to draw men to a common centre by preaching 
a great central and unifying truth. That great 
central truth is that which is both centred and 
sphered in an unlifted Christ. When men are drawn 
to His person, His service, and His salvation, you 
have a basis for that real unity which alone meets 
the conditions of our Lord’s intercessory prayer— 
“That they all may be one, as Thou Father art in 
me, and I in Thee.” Not organically one, but one 
in the harmony of an interior life derived from a 
common source, sustained by a common faith, and 
having a common end and aim. 

When the pure strength of Evangelical truth 
welling up in life-giving freshness in the Word of 
God shall flow more freely through the channels of 
Apostolic order and sacramental ordinances; when 
this Evangelical spirit, to which the Church of 
England owed its revival of life and activity in the 
last century, shall avail itself more of churchly 
agencies, and address itself more to working along 
Church lines, with the same zeal with which it has 
so well addressed itself to the maintenance and 
defence of doctrine, and shall thus make the clergy 
and the parishes alive with new-born zeal and love, 
showing by their own example that they are as 
earnest, as sincere, as self-sacrificing, as sound in the 
faith and as loyal to the Church as those whom they 
condemn—then will the spirit of lawlessness, and 
erroneous and strange doctrine, and the sickly 
imitations of a foreign communion be met and 
answered by a purer faith, a more Christ-like zeal, a 

214 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

more obedient reverence to the powers that be as 
ordained of God, and a higher and holier aim— 
namely, the advancement, not of self nor of party, 
but the honour and glory of the uplifted Christ. 
Looking in another direction, we find the Church 
confronted by critical scepticism and scientific doubt, 
which aim to break down the bulwarks of her faith 
and raze her walls of salvation to the ground. But 
while we survey this frowning evil, let us not be un- 
duly alarmed, or make too hasty concessions, but be 
vigilant and wise in meeting it on broad and sound 
erounds. Holding to the Bible as our sole rule of 
faith and practice, we must maintain the supremacy 
of the Bible by placing it in its right position ; and 
that is, that it is a perfectly completed book. The 
Bible of to-day is the Bible of all the centuries of the 
Christian era, and will be of all the centuries to come. 
As it came from Him, it can neither be added to nor 
taken from without incurring the anathema of its 
Author. But the science which opposes this Bible 
is but the science of to-day. It was not the science 
of the last century; it will not be of the century to 
come. These sciences, of whatever name, are vari- 
able and uncertain. Not one is on a fixed and im- 
movable basis. Not one that may not be altered, or 
set aside by some new discovery, or by some new 
generalization. It will be time enough to say whether 
these sciences and the Bible do agree when the per- 
fected circle of science shall be placed on the per- 
fected circle of the Holy Scriptures. Then only can 
we rightly measure each, and when that time comes 
it will be found that the circumference of science and 
the circumference of revelation have one and the 
same periphery, because they have one and the same 
Divine Centre, the same one living and true God. 
In the Apostles’ day there were “oppositions of 
science falsely so-called.” In every age since then 
the same assaults have been renewed, but the Bible 
has calmly held on its way. It waits patiently for 

Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 215 

confirmation as the ages roll on, and each advance 
of true science does bring it more into accord 
with revelation. What the clergy have to do is not 
to attempt to put on Saul’s armour and go forth to 
fight what they would call a Philistine science with 
something that they have not proved and cannot 
wield, but to take the smooth stones out of the brook 
of Scripture, and in the name of the Uplifted One so 
hurl them that even giant defiers of the Israel of God 
shall fall before the simple truth, slung by the hum- 
blest shepherd of the flock. This preaching is now, 
as in Paul’s day, to the Jew a stumbling-block, and 
to the Greek foolishness, but it is still what it was 
then, and what it will ever be, Christ the power of 
God and the wisdom of God. When the Apostles 
preached this uplifted Christ, they did it not in the 
words which man’s wisdom teacheth, lest the Cross 
of Christ should be made of none effect, but with 
that simple plainness of men fully imbued with the 
truth which they heralded, and telling it out in the 
fulness and directness of that earnestness which all 
will feel who realize that they are bought with a 
price, even the precious blood of the uplifted Jesus. 
Looking in still another direction, we find the 
Church in the midst of social evils which threaten 
alike the well-being of the Church and of the State. 
Can the Church deal with these manifold economical 
questions which at times so seriously agitate the 
whole framework of human society? Yes. The 
uplifting of Christ will do it. The most important 
factor in the world’s history was the coming down 
into it of Christ our Lord. His incarnation is the 
axle on which turn all the wheels of human life. 
Any science of sociology which leaves Him out as its 
central and controlling power is, like a science of the 
solar system without the sun, erroneous at its centre 
and erroneous at its circumference. It is the pre- 
sence of Christ in the world that has given birth to 
all the philanthopies of the world—is banishing its 

216 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

most crying evils and bringing in all that is refining 
and elevating in mind and heart and life. This 
being so, and no student of history can truly deny it, 
it follows that all that is needed to meet and remove 
the social evils of our time is the clear, true, and 
forceful setting forth of Christ as the Light and Life 
of men. For justin proportion as they bask in His 
light and breathe the breath of His life will they 
become Christlike in mind and heart, and the preva- 
lence of the mind of Christ and the love of Christ 
will change the moral and social aspect of the world. 

Finally, God has set before the Church of this 
age an open door into the regions beyond and bidden 
her go in and possess the land. Never, it may truly 
be said, has the Church been so thoroughly equipped 
as now for missionary work. Geographical explora- 
tion and commercial adventure have opened up to us 
long unknown and almost mythical regions. Ethno- 
logy and philology have brought the varying lan- 
guages and races of men into better classification. 
Technical art and science have put into our hands 
implements and skill for reforming and enlarging all 
the industrial pursuits of men. Thus these auxiliary 
forces become in the progress of time almost apostles 
of Christianity. 

A higher and truer education in heathen lands 
must result in breaking down the old errors based 
on ignorance and superstitions. Science is already 
at work through manifold ways, undermining and 
sapping the Oriental religions—Buddhism, Brah- 
minism, Confucianism, Lamaism — and preparing 
the way for their downfall. It has not been until 
within a few years that we have really understood 
the doctrines, usages, and inner power of the 
dominating religions of Asia. We have known their 
general features, but have mostly grouped them 
all together in one idolatrous mass of hopeless 
superstition and cruel orgies, and as such have 
levelled our theological artillery relentlessly against 

Sermon of the Bishop oy Pennsylvania. 217 

them. Now, however, through the labours of men 
who seem to have been specially raised up for the 
purpose, the eight great religions of the world into 
which Max Miiller reduces the many schemes of 
human worship have been studied and analysed, and 
their sacred books carefully translated, annotated, 
and compared with our own, so that almost a new 
science—the science of comparative religion—has 
been created by the diligent and painstaking men 
who have made careful surveys of these Oriental 
religions, and enabled us to weigh, measure, and 
examine systems of belief which hold more than one- 
half the human race in their moulding power. Thus 
Christianity is fast acquiring all those outside forces 
necessary to give to it a world-wide equipment for 
its world-wide conquest. And when the evangelistic 
forces of the Church shall go forth in their full power, 
it will be with a momentum hitherto unknown, 
enabling her to do in a day the work of a year, and 
in a year the work of centuries, until, through these 
vastly-augmented agencies, blessed and utilised by 
the Holy Ghost, it shall be literally true as the pro- 
phet has declared, “a nation shall be born in a day.” 

Brethren, beloved, this is the great work which is 
intrusted to us in an especial manner, to proclaim in 
all the quarters of the world where our lot is cast an 
uplifted Jesus. We are to lift Him up by exalting 
the Divine Scripture, in which He is enshrined; by 
exalting the sacrament which shows forth this up- 
lifting until He come; by exalting the ministry 
appointed by Christ Himself to be His heralds and 
teachers; by exalting the Church, which is His 
mystical Body,—exalting all these things, not by 
exalting them above Him, of Whom and to Whom 
they all testify ; but because they are all means and 
aids for getting a better, clearer, and more life-giving 
view of the uplifted Jesus. 

All attempt to put anything between the soul 
of the sinner and the uplifted Christ, or to raise 


218 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

anything to the same level with Him, is derogatory 
to His honour and contrary to His Word. To what 
purpose would the bitten Israelite have been told to 
look at the serpent of brass lifted up by Moses in the 
wilderness if anything had been placed by Moses or 
the elders of Israel between the eyes of the sufferer 
and the object to which he was directed to look? Or 
if alongside of that serpent of brass had been placed 
other objects to which equal efficacy was attributed, 
and thus confused his mind and deflected his faith ? 
This lifting up of Christ in all the aspects of His 
offices as Prophet, Priest, and King can be done by 
us only as we are taught by the Holy Ghost, for it 
is His office to take of the things of Christ and to 
show them unto men. Dear brethren, if there is one 
thought more than another which presses upon me at 
this time, in reference especially to the work com- 
mitted to us as Bishops in the Church of God, it is 
that we need a fresh baptism of the Holy Spirit and 
fresh outpouring into our hearts of the love-power of 
the uplifted Jesus. If even Apostles, the three years’ 
daily companions of our blessed Lord when He 
dwelt among men, had no power to preach the Cross 
of Christ until the Holy Spirit came upon them, 
surely we need to be sprinkled from on high, that 
Pentecostal grace may not merely light upon our 
heads in tongue-like flames but that, like the precious 
ointment upon the head of Aaron that went down to 
the skirts of his garments, the unction that the Holy 
Spirit only can bestow may flow over our whole being, 
sanctifying our lives, enlightening our minds, giving 
grace to our lips, and wisdom to our acts, and power 
to our administration, so that it may be said of each 
of us as of the first martyr, St. Stephen, “He was a 
man: full of faith and of the Holy Ghost.” : 
Our ministry of the Word and our office as Bishops 
can only be duly and wisely discharged in and 
through the power and guidance of the Holy Ghost. 
Let us never forget that this is the source of all 

Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 210 

ministerial strength and grace and influence. Our 
constant and wrestiing prayer should be that we may 
daily increase in that Holy Spirit more and more 
until we come unto His everlasting kingdom. 

Let us also, dear brethren, endeavour to induce the 
clergy to be more diligent and distinct in setting 
forth this uplifted Christ as the great sunlike truth 
of our salvation. The real remedy for the troubles 
within our own Church is not by repressive, or by 
restrictive, or by punitive legislation ; is not by courts 
of law, civil or ecclesiastical ; is not by bandying 
criminous and contemptuous words, and organising 
parties in battle array under standards and principles 
foreign to the spirit of the Gospels, but it is a more 
faithful setting forth of Christ. 

But I must stop, though many and weighty topics 
rise in my mind, created by the occasion. 

The day has arrived when this assembly of Angli- 
can Bishops will separate. But before we separate, 
our hearts are to be re-knit together by participation 
in that blessed Sacrament which, while it binds each 
to each, binds all as one to the heart of our common 
Lord. From that altar we shall.go away northward 
to the Arctic Circle, southward to Australia, east- 
ward to China, westward to the United States, never 
to meet together as a body here below. Of the 
seventy-six Bishops gathered at the last Lambeth 
Conference in 1867, thirty are dead. Death has 
reaped out of that assembly a rich harvest, and 
garnered up some of the wisest, the noblest, the 
holiest men, who ever bore the burden of the Epis- 
copate. They rest together in the Paradise of God. 

This thought cannot but give a tone of solemnity 
to this sacred hour; yet along with this under-tone 
of sorrow rises up our souls’ Ze Deum that we have 
been permitted to meet as brethren, to confer so long 
and so lovingly together, and to part with that pro- 
found respect and affection which intercourse has 
engendered and which love has cemented. 

: roa 

220 Lambeth Conference of 1878. 

Speaking as an American Bishop, and in behalf 
of American Bishops, I feel warranted in saying that 
we desire thus publicly to acknowledge the manifold 
courtesies and civilities which have been so markedly 
bestowed upon us—that we appreciate and shall ever 
remember the unwearied kindness and loving words 
of our brethren of the English bench, and of all others 
who made up this Conference. 

We have learned here lessons of wisdom and zeal 
which will influence all our future. We go back 
richer than we came, for we return with the wealth 
of new friendships, new plans of usefulness, new 
aspirations after higher results, and the treasured 
memories of Church life and home life into which, as 
into a garden of spices, we have been so lovingly 
invited. Our admiration of the Church of England 
has been greatly increased. As we have walked 
around its walls, grey with antiquity, and marked 
well its bulwarks, scarred, but not weakened, by the 
conflicts of the Christian centuries; as we have 
associated with those who bear Episcopal rule in this 
Zion, and with the band of learned and self-sacrificing 
clergy who work therein, and with the intelligent 
and zealous and liberal laity that form the noble 
body of the faithful—as we have surveyed all these 
we may have seen here and there things that are 
strange to us, points that we should have altered, 
defects, as we might term them, that needed correc- 
tion, the filling up of some crevice here, and the 
stripping off of some of the old ivy there ; but after all 
we should be forced toexclaim, “ Beautiful for situation, 
the joy of the whole earth is this City of our God: Her 
foundations are on the everlasting hills. The Lord is 
in the midst of her; she shall not be moved. God shall 
help her, and that right early.” As I behold the 
‘grand spectacle which the Anglican Church now 
presents—bristling with its. multiplied agencies 
and vigorous with re-enkindled life and earnestness, 
and contrast it with the impotence of its assailers 

Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania, 221 

and the envy of its rivals, I recall the magnificent 
vision of Milton, in which he describes the rising 
power and glory of the Commonwealth; and 
substituting the word “Church” for the word 
“nation,” I seem to find in it a description of 
the present aspect of the spiritual commonwealth 
of dear old England. “Methinks,” says the blind 
bard, “I see in my mind, a noble and puissant 
Church, rousing herself like a strong man after sleep, 
and shaking her invincible locks; methinks I see 
her as an eagle, renewing her mighty youth, and 
kindling her undazzled eyes at the full midday beam, 
purging and unscaling her long-abused sight at the 
fountain itself of heavenly radiance ; while the whole 
noise of timorous and flocking birds, with those also 
that love the twilight, flutter about amazed at what 
she means,’ and, I may add, confounded at her 
revived greatness. And so we say, with one mouth 
and one heart, to the dear mother of us all, the 
Church of England, “ Peace be within thy walls, and 
plenteousness within thy palaces. For my brethren 
and companions’ sake, I will wish thee prosperity.” 

The next time, dear brethren, that we meet 
together will be before the Great White Throne. 
Such a thought warns us that we must be watching, 
waiting, working, until the day of death comes ; and 
when that shall come, may we each, through faith in 
the atoning blood of the uplifted Jesus, pass in 
through the gate into the celestial city, and hear 
from the lips of Him who sitteth upon the throne, 
“Well done, good and faithful servant, enter thou 
into the joy of thy Lord.” 

222 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

No. XXVI. 

Prayer for the Conference. 

LORD God Almighty, Father of Lights and 

Fountain of all Wisdom : we humbly beseech Thee 
that Thy Holy Spirit may lead into all truth Thy servants 
the Bishops now [to be] gathered together in Thy Name. 
Grant them Grace to think and do such things as shall 
tend most to Thy Glory and the good of Thy Holy 
Church : direct and prosper, we pray Thee, all their con- 
sultations, and further them with Thy continual help, that, 
the true Catholic and Apostolic Faith once delivered to 
the Saints being maintained, Thy Church may serve Thee 
in righteousness of living and in all godly quietness 

through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. 

Programme of Conference. 223 


Papers issued to the Bishops before the first Services 
or Meetings in connection with the Conference 
of 1888. 


The following are the official arrangements with 
respect to the forthcoming Lambeth Conference. 

3.0 p.m. * Service in Canterbury Cathedral. 

MonpDaAY, JULY 2nd. 
7. p.m. * Service in Westminster Abbey, with 
Sermon by the Archbishop of Canterbury. 

[Bishops and Chaplains attending this Service will enter 
the Abbey through Dean’s Yard, by the Jerusalem Cham- 
ber entrance. | 

11.0am. * Holy Communion in Lambeth Palace 
Chapel, with Sermon by the Bishop of Minnesota, 
deputed by the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant 
Episcopal Church in the United States. 

1.30 p.m.—4.45 p.m. 
First Session of the Conference in Lambeth 
Palace Library— 

(A) Opening Address by the Archbishop of 
(8) Discussion of Subject (No. II.)—“ Definite 

teaching of the Faith to various classes and the means 

To be introduced by the Bishops of London, Maine, and 


224 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

10.45 am. Litany in Lambeth Palace Chapel. 

11.0 a.m.—1I.30 p.m. 

Discussion of Subject (No. III.)\—*“ The Anglican © 
Communion in relation to the Eastern Churches, to the 
Scandinavian and other Reformed Churches, to the old 
Catholics and others.” 

To be introduced by the Archbishop of Dublin, the Bishops 
of Winchester, Gibraltar, Lichfield, Jamaica, and Bishop 

2.0 p.m.—4.45 p.m. 

Discussion of Subject (No. IV.)— Polygamy of 
Heathen Converts.—Divorce.” 

To be introdued by the Bishops of Durham, Chester, 
Zululand, The Niger, Maryland, and Bombay. 

10.45 am. Litany in Lambeth Palace Chapel. 

[1.0 a.m.—I.30 p.m. 

Discussion of Subject (No. V.)—‘“ Authoritative 
Standards of Doctrine and Worship.” 

To be introduced by the Bishops of Sydney, Aberdeen, 
Western New York, Salisbury, and Albany. 

2.0 p.m.—4.45 p.m. 

Discussion of Subject (No. VI.)—“ Mutual relations 
of Dioceses and Branches of the Anglican Communion.” 

To be introduced by the Bishops of Capetown, Brechin, 
and Derry. 

10.45 am. Litany in Lambeth Palace Chapel. 
11.0 a.m.—1I.30 p.m., and 2.0 p.m.—4.45 p.m. 
Discussion of Subject (No. I.)—“ The Church's 

Programme of Conference. 225 

practical work in relation to (A) Intemperance. (B) 
Purity. (C) Care of Emigrants. (D) Soctalism.” 

To be introduced by (A) the Bishops of London and New 
York ; (B) the Bishops of Durham and Calcutta ; (C) 
the Bishops of Liverpool, North Queensland, and 
Quebec ; (D) the Bishops of Manchester and Mississippi. 


Meetings of the various Committees appointed 
during the first week’s Sessions. 

MONDAY, JULY 23rd, to FRIDAY, JULY 27th. 

Sessions of Conference in Lambeth Palace Library 
to receive and consider the Reports of the various 
Committees. Litany, each day, in Chapel, at 10.45, 
except on Wednesday, July 25th (S. James’ Day), 
when there will be a celebration of Holy Communion 
at 10.0 a.m. 


Ir am. * Concluding Service in St. Paul’s 
Cathedral, with Sermon by the Archbishop of York. 

At the services marked thus (*) the Bishops pre- 
sent are requested to attend in their Episcopal Robes. 
It is requested that each Bishop present at the ser- 
vices in Westminster Abbey and St. Paul’s Cathedral 
may be attended by one Chaplain (or Acting Chap- 
lain) who will take a place in the procession. The 
arrangements at Canterbury and at Lambeth Palace 
will not admit of the attendance of any Chaplains. 
If such Bishops (and Chaplains) as can conveniently 
do so would go already robed to Westminster Abbey 
and St. Paul’s, it would relieve the necessary pressure 
upon the space available for robing. In the case of 
the Lambeth Palace service, rooms will beset apart 
for robing and unrobing—as Episcopal Robes will 

226 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

not be worn during the Conference Debates. Pas- 
toral Staves will in no case be carried except by 
the Diocesans in whose Cathedrals the services are 


The rule found necessary at the former Con- 
ferences will be again adopted—that should any 
petitions or memorials be presented to the Con- 
ference, they be placed without discussion in the 
hands of the President ; and that it be understood 
that no answer can in any case be returned. 


Episcopal Secretary. 

(Dean of Windsor.) General Secretary: 

(Archdeacon of Maidstone.) A ς sistan t Secretary. 

June 23rd, 1888. 


The following arrangements have now been made 
in connection with the forthcoming Lambeth Con- 
ference :— 

1. In the debates of the opening week the formal 
motion proposed will in each case be for the appoint- 
ment of a Committee to consider the particular 
subject, and to report in the closing week of the 

2. Certain Bishops conversant with the particular 
subjects have been invited to open the several dis- 

Programme of Conference. 227 

cussions, but time will as far as possible be afforded 
for the speeches of others who may wish to take part 
in the opening debates. 

3. It is requested that the names of Bishops who. 
may be regarded as specially qualified to serve on 
the different- Committees, may be handed to the 
secretaries, either before or during the opening de- 
bates, for the President’s consideration before the 
Committees are nominated. 

4. The invited speakers are requested, in opening 
the discussions, to express their views by means of 
speeches, not written papers, and it is particularly 
hoped that no speech will exceed fifteen minutes in 
duration, opportunity for fuller treatment of the 
subjects being afforded in the discussions and 
reports of the Committees. 

5. A verbatim report of all the speeches will, as 
before, be taken, and the transcript will be preserved 
at Lambeth. No part of the debates will be open to 
the public. 

6. The rule found necessary at the former Con- 
ferences will be again adopted—that, should any 
petitions or memorials be presented to the Conference, 
they be placed without discussion in the hands of the 
President ; and that it be understood that no answers 
can, in any case, be returned. 

7. It is requested that each Bishop attending the 
Services in Westminster Abbey and St. Paul’s Cathe- 
dral may be attended by one Chaplain (or Acting 
Chaplain), who will take a place in the procession. 
The arrangements at Canterbury and at Lambeth’ 
Palace will not admit of the attendance of any 

June 9th, 1888. 

228 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

In reply to enquiries from several Bishops as 
to whether the red (“ Convocation”) chimere should 
be worn by the Bishops attending the Lambeth 
Conference Services, the Archbishop of Canterbury 
has recommended that, for the sake of uniformity 
and convenience, the dress worn by all the Bishops 
should be the ordinary Episcopal Habit—black 
chimere with lawn rochet and D.D. hood. Chap- 
lains to wear cassock, surplice, hood and scarf. 

25th June, 1888. 

No. XXVIII. (See page 41.) 

Sermon preached by the Archbishop of Canterbury, 
in Westminster Abbey, on Monday Evening, 
July 2, 1888. . 

“All the body fitly framed and knit together through that 
which every joint supplieth.”—EPH. iv. 16. 

THE well-known words—so rich, so worthy, might 
seem a motto for this Abbey in its glorious age. 
But they are fitter to describe this Assembly in its 
perfect modernness. They are the Christian view 
of the facts of the Church’s growth—facts seen from 
within. The structural progress of the organism is 
what the Apostle notes. 

The consequent changes in the surrounding world 
are no less notable. Her materials of beauty and 
strength, added to the new, are in a way subtracted | 
from the old. Shaped and glorified and quickened 
they are replaced at the service of the old. For the 

Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 220 

Church is not a dead Temple quarried out of living 
rock and leaving a chasm behind. It is still in the 
world. A living Temple into which a half-dead 
world is to be absorbed. 

The world has abundant vitality to resent the 
process. Hence, not only old persecutions, but all 
antagonism, all dislike—save that large amount 
which is drawn on us by our own inconsistencies. 

Some thinking people still find it doubtful whether 
the world will ever be absorbed by Christianity, as 
Christ and the writers of the New Testament 
evidently conceive that it will be. 

But there was a time when greater thinkers still 
would have held any theory of the unity of Man, to 
be brought about by any cause whatever, irrational 
and unnatural, an evident contradiction of all such 
design as could be attributed to nature. 

For instance, in the long and beautiful fragment 
which remains to us of the Sixth Book of Cicero’s 
greatest work—his treatise “ Of the Republic,”’—he 
sketches the physical features of the distribution of 
man on the globe. From the Milky Way he marks 
in vision the few, the narrow, and the scattered 
“patches” of the earth which were habitable—-the 
waste, impassable tracts which severed the races of 
mankind—the invincible impossibility of serviceable 
communications. It is from these laws and cer- 
tainties of nature, that he draws the lofty, melancholy 
moral of the worthless narrowness of human fame. 
“The Southern Zone bears absolutely no relation to 
the condition of Europe. Even Europe has very little 
nterest in the eyes of the humane world of Italy.” 

This was the judgment of a mind open to all the 
considerations which had hitherto suggested them- 
selves in thought and literature. Yet a few years 
later a society was summoned into existence whose 
earliest call was to be “ Fishers of Men,” to gather 
together in one ‘the children of God who were 
scattered abroad.” 

230᾽ Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

The Statesman expressly affirms it to be “un- 
imaginable that the mightiest Name from lands of 
civilisation and culture should pass the eternal 
barriers of Caucasus or be wafted over Ganges.” <A. 
few years later the Apostle was writing of “Onc 
Name to which every knee would bow.” 

To the Christian it was in the nature of things 
that scattered humanity should be welded into one 
mass, and the uniting attraction be the human 
Name of Jesus. The Oneness of Humanity is the 
essence of the Faith. The One Body not yet “ fitly 
framed together,” but, as the Apostle literally wrote, 
“framing itself together,’ as by an hourly process, is 
the Ideal to which all work, all energies should be 
directed. This includes and involves every impulse, 
every labour of the Church. This is the sum of her 
self-offering to the Glory of the Father. 

The Church looks very far forward and very far 
behind. Missions, which in all the pressure of their: 
necessity are upon us now, are but one step. The 
consolidating and compacting of what has been long - 
converted is a parallel, a continuous, a greater work. 
Missions have known long pauses in their progress— 
how long was that which followed the conversion of 
England—centuries in which unchristian races lay 
about Christendom and threatened its existence. 
If Missions are vital, the conservation of Christianity 
within our populations and the confederation of 
Christian populations are no less of a necessity 
for the Kingdom of God, and manifestly no less a 

It has been pretended that the development of the 
Anglican communion springs rather from the exten- 
sion of our race than from the energy of our faith. 
It would indeed be difficult to outrun the race-wave 
which now sweeps all shores. Yet there are boun- 
teous archipelagos, populous tropic wildernesses, 
primeval churches in peril among the heathen, where 
the English or American missioner’s is the only house- 

Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 231 

hold which belongs to our race. And were it 
otherwise, the mission spirit is at least now eminently 
characteristic of the blood. Southern Europe had 
been drawn out earlier, through its natural contact 
with the East, and the struggles at home kept our 
efforts low. With the Reformation came one touch to 
our national conscience. Our Elizabethan mariners 
dedicating continents to Christ, witness in some 
measure to a consciousness that Gospel and Church 
were gifts to beimparted. Yet it ought to sting us to 
think that it is but a century since England found 
in her heart to give her America a bishop; but a 
century since our convict ships landed their terrible 
freight in Australia, with no more spiritual comforters 
than the musketeers. Alas! it is not ninety years since 
we first began to repay the precious earthly things 
of either Africa or Asia with a share in our spiritual 
things. Would that it were more possible than it is 
to identify the extension of our race with that of our 
faith. Yet signs do still follow the footsteps of them 
that believe ; and new churches are forming new 
nations even as we were formed. Higher ideas 
of the basis of society, of the marriage union, of 
family life, of self-restraint, of truthfulness, not only 
lift the individual but form the people. A recog- 
nised commercial morality, an even administration 
of justice, a conscience in dealing with subject races, 
public action on principles not merely selfish, the 
devotion of lives to benevolent causes, are things 
found under Christian Governments, and scarcely 
looked for elsewhere. Independent witnesses avow 
these to be direct results of Christian faith, and the 
growth of national character through these, far more 
than numbers of adherents, or prevalence of obser- 
vances, assures us that the Church is still the nurse 
of nations. 

We know the need of caution—how we may 
enervate native churches by nursing them too long 
or wreck them by launching them too soon; we 

232 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

know that diversity of development according to the 
genius of the races is essential to their vitality ; we 
know isolation may peril unity, and independence 
risk disintegration ; still we know how Church life 
fostered our own early nationality, how the recovery 
of a national Church awoke all the force and fire of 
our national spirit, and we long to see many dormant 
peoples born to the world, by being born to Christ. 

Surely we draw near to the threshold of an era 
in which the fulfilment of such hopes will come. 
What the Roman vision saw as wild wastes round a 
few centres of light, are now old empires. Those 
empires are small regions compared with the wastes 
into which the overflowing peoples stream onward, 
miles in a day; those overflowing peoples are few 
compared with the dark races which once were 
thought born for slavery either in their old homes 
or their new—few compared with the labour-popula- 
tions that surge up on many shores, or even with the 
utterly new-born half-races owned and disowned both 
by East and West. Will not all these follow the old 
lines of history? Will not these be empires to which 
what we have called colossal will be pigmy ? And the 
Church of Christ, if she has a mission to any, has a 
mission to all. What tremendous issues! If she 
meets them, the Church history of the past is a mere 
preface to the volume. 

Or think of the countries where Commerce, taking 
the field at once with capital and labour at com- 
mand, founds harbours and marts great and fair 
as the old world’s. Step by step with their creation, 
their redemption, we think, may keep pace. Where 
resources, where energies are practically unlimited 
the spirit, we think, will not fail. Nor does it. But 
side by side with all, arise the old world’s problems 
in all their pain and perplexity. The old world’s 
quarrels are perpetuated, when their origins, which 
᾿ gave them some sad dignity, are forgotten and grown 
meaningless. If spreading churches glory to be part 

Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 233 

and parcel with us, and we with them, we pray them 
at least to forget English divisions, and to be at such 
unity among themselves that rays from their circle 
may be focussed here. 

Two such enterprises might seem vocation enough 
—to form peoples that are no peoples into the one 
people of God—and to weld into affectionate religion 
the new-born communities of commerce. But there 
is a third worthy to rank with the other two—namely, 
to win to the cross the fully-organised civilisations of 
remote antiquity which are saturated with religious 
feeling. Of those primeval religions the root con- 
viction is one of three. Either self-sacrifice on the 
part of God is inconceivable ; or the Incarnation of 
a God is in quest of a higher or lower pleasure ; or 
else there is no personality in heaven or earth which 
is worth the keeping. Were it not worth all we are 
or have if we could contribute aught to dispel such 
dire glooms and substitute the certainties that there 
is no sacrifice which God has not made for man; that 
the Incarnation means an eternity of love for all 
humanity ; that we shall for ever be ourselves, yet 
rising from glory to glory. 

Within the bosom of Christendom itself lie pro- 
blems no less strange. While distant difficulties call 
only for faithful activity on the part of our own 
churches, the nearest questions are the hardest, the 
nearest duties most dim and indistinct. There is the 
inevitable reformation—or inevitable decline in the 
faith—of some western populations. There is the 
revival of languid and oppressed churches in things 
that belong to divine knowledge, morals, spiritual 
diligence. Some churches are in danger of absorp- 
tion; some have “fought” and “almost devoured 
one another;” some rival even Israel itself in 
dispersion and in tenacity; in some the clerical 
order includes the most enlightened and the rudest 
of the community; in some, a yearning to undeceive 
the people of gross superstitions is crushed by a 


234 < Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

forbidding fear of yielding up outworks which seem 
like a fence of Faith. Intrude we may not: yet we 
can still less refuse to touch such burdens with a 
finger, and look on prayerless and unsympathising. 

The ages lengthen out apace. The work of Christ 
is not accomplished. The world judges by results. 
That matters not if it be the Master’s will that His 
chariot drive heavily; that the salvation of the 
Gentiles linger, and the unity of man tarry. But do 
we think it is so? or are we conscious of causes 
purely human, of wills and factions that despise 
peace ? 

Yet the movement is onward though the pace is 
halting. Tremblingly yet rejoicingly we do believe 
that new charities blossom from our differences. The 
attitude of an opponent now is almost always an 
attitude of respect. The asperities of the present 
are almost milder than the forbearance of the past. 
Affection between advocates of mutually destructive 
views is no unreal or unwonted thing. If rougher 
tests of progress are of value, much more so is the 
prevalence of a spirit which makes characteristic 
diversities not merely tend towards truce, but lean 
longingly towards unity. For this, beyond question, 
is the working of the Spirit of Christ. 

If we look back now for causes which have pro- 
moted this growing unity of spirit, we find it in the 
activity of those forces which rescue, which teach, 
which guide, which comfort, which raise, which feed, 
which warm. Whatever outside of Christianity does 
these works, does Christ’s work. 

The forces which are set forth in Christ’s two 
Sacraments and in the two Apostolic rites of Confir- 
mation and Ordination are these. They are the 
forces that cleanse, and bind together; that strengthen, 
and organize for growth. On the contrary the spirit 
of Regulation—the intrusive meddling spirit which 
travesties the spirit of Order—whether it exhibit 
itself in minute prescription or minute litigation— 

Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 235 

the spirit (to speak plainly) of so many Councils 
since the earliest, has been often the apple of discord, 
and often the germ of schisms. 

I. The energy which within the Church has in our 
times revived the courage and increased the activity 
of our peoples, which has added continents and 
islands to the conquests of the faith ; the attraction 
which has held together many elements of division, 
and even welded them into strong instruments of 
work, has been found again and again to reside in 
those Strong Centres which Apostles designed for this 
very function of assigning work to all, and stimu- 
lating the zeal of all. Natural analogies are perhaps 
not mere resemblances, but the same laws of God. 
In our own national history at any rate, and in the 
history of the Churches, we find ourselves well 
warned to keep our Christian groupings wide enough, 
and our centres strong enough. Strong by position 
to traverse, to learn from, to influence each rank and 
class by turns; strong in councils of men, sufficiently 
versed in the world’s thought and experience, habitu- 
ally taught by devotional lives to refer daily ques- 
tions to eternal principles; faithful to administer and 
to apply far reaching organizations for the benefit of 
the bodies and minds and spirits of men. Through 
this strong system, however short of its ideal, still an 
ideal influence has been exercised within Christian 
society, and by that society on all surrounding 

The very errors that have been made have tested 
it. When every petty city of Africa had its bishop 
and the doctrine of episcopacy was strongest, the 
effectiveness of the episcopate was lowest. A Cyprian 
had no difficulty in obtaining their unanimous vote, 
a vote contrary to Scripture principle, Church tradi- 
tion, and the subsequent ruling of the Catholic word— 
a vote that heretical or schismatical baptism was void. 

Vigour and character were not in hand for so many 
posts of leaders. Poly-episcopacy ceased to be epis- 


236 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

copacy when the diocese became so small a unit. 
When every civil district in Phrygia and Galatia 
became a see, failing such an imperial will as Cy- 
prian’s to unite them, their controversies became, 
according to St. Paul’s forecast, internecine. The 
like multiplication in Italy converted churches into 
cliques, and delivered Italy over to the one strong 
see, and Europe followed the leading country. 

Half a century with us has seen seven colonial 
sees grow to seventy, and so vast still is their area, 
that another half-century will not be too long to 
work out the sub-division. Yet the old policy of 
England must be nowhere forgotten, that sub-division 
should cease before dioceses become too small for the 
influence of each to radiate through all, before the 
administration anywhere becomes so narrow as to 
represent only local patriotism. 

II. Yet strong central forces are not all that is 
required to prevent a merely larger congregationalism 
from supplanting the catholic system. Much has 
been said, done, tested, which shows that these times 
demand supplementary organizations. We should 
lack either courage or intelligence if we did not 
admit it. The three-fold ministry is complete in 
itself for its own great ends. The seals of its 
origin are patent. But outside those ends are 
many functions to which it is not adapted. The 
long attempt to adapt it brings out the inadequacy. 
From the Apostolic text of the Epistles down to the 
last Parochial Report of any well worked district 
we see how much energy and blessing lives in other 
orders in the Church. There is a vast reservoir of 
devotion truly ministerial, which cannot possibly 
discharge itself through that triple channel. We 
have on a small scale the partial Dedication of lay- 
reading, school-teaching, visiting, “ Church-work,” 
as it is called, at large. Very precious are these. 
All of them practical uses of Spiritual Gifts. No- 
thing less, But it is confessed that the whole Anglican 

Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury, 237 

group is weak in the life of sisterhoods, and brother- 
hoods, and “ armies,” as, when well trained, they may 
be not unfitly called. The self-devotion of such 
auxiliaries, as they elsewhere exist, is not less, but 
more, absorbing than that of the ministry itself. 
One church there is which candour places beyond 
praise for the ceaseless multitudinous self-surrender 
of men to energetic life-work, without fee or reward, 
without property or domestic life. They multiply 
infinitely the effectiveness of the ministry. Say that 
that Church is careless of pure doctrine or ignorant 
of Scripture Truth ; that makes the facts still more 
marked for us, if Truth suggests sacrifice for the 
Truth, or for the souls that want the Truth. Here 
with us they would be, not as of old foreign influ- 
ences set against the organization of diocese and 
parish, but as already in these beginnings dependent 
on both, and part of both, and their main work the 
carrying of the Gospel into unreached places. What 
is the reason that they are missing? Have abuses 
created an eternal prejudice against the thing abused ? 
Have we no confidence in our own safeguards? 
Have we cut down the oak to kill the ivy? Orare 
the centres we spoke of not now strong enough to 
take additional strain? Or is there force, but no 
material for it to lay hold upon ? 

Or may we think there is indeed ἃ gradual 
deepening of spiritual yearnings, a gradual leavening 
of spiritual men into readiness to reply, “ Here I 
am; send me,’ when the voice is heard from the 
throne, “Whom shall we send, and who will go 
for us?” 

I incline from some signs, even from the safe- 
guards themselves, to think this is the account of our 
position. There are flecks of glory along our horizon, 
and they surely are lights of dawn, not relics of 

But the beginning must be in some real, definite 
spritual conquest. Let such a trained band complete 

538 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

the virtual Christianisation of a town or district here, 
er among our fellow-subjects in India, or work the 
conversion of such an untouched land as the Corea, 
and a new impulse would strike every home and 
foreign mission. Men would wonder then not at the 
smallness, but the largeness of what had been done 
hitherto with such slight forces. They would wonder 
still more that Church life had rolled on so many 
days without auxiliaries, almost without voluntary 

III. “ Some spiritual conquest,” I said. The word 
“spiritual” must be the keynote of all we do, 
say, think about the Church’s daily new-born work. 
The spirit makes itself a body to dwell in. All 
needed material help would wait upon a spiritual 
outburst as ever of old. 

“Ye are built upa spiritual house.” Spiritual yet 
built. Built but remaining spiritual. 

Prophets and Apostles foresaw all worldly material 
brought and built into it. Yet it was to remain 
spiritual. When it ceases to be so it is no more 
the building which will bear the Trial and the Fire. 

We know well that spiritual life may be real 
without apostolic form. Only we seem to see that, 
even in its most beautiful and manifold manifesta- 
tions, it cannot without that form propagate itself 
indefinitely. Time after time spiritual varieties 
surrender their separate life and merge into the 
completer existence. 

On the other hand, we know well, that there 
may be apostolic form without spiritual life, and 
that like any other form that lacks life, its end is to 
break up and supply pabulum for lower forms of life. 

Our own humble, hopeful confidence, lies in the 
possession of apostolic form with fervent spiritual 
charity and living faith. The form is secured. Our 
every-day vigilance must be for the spiritual anima- 
tion, the spiritual “increase of every part in that 
which every joint supplieth.” 

Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 230 

An unworldly church, an unworldly clergy, means 
not a poor church or poverty-stricken clergy. A 
poor, unprovided, dependent clergy is scarcely able 
to be an unworldly one, and certainly cannot betoken 
an unworldly laity. A laity which breaks the bread 
of its ministers into smaller and smaller fragments, 
and has none of the divine will to multiply, works 
no miracle and has no honour. 

Unworldliness is not emptiness of garners, but the 
right and noble use of garners filled by God. An 
unworldly clergy is not a clergy without a world, but 
one which knows the world, uses and teaches man 
how to use the world for God until it brings at last | 
the whole world home to God. 

Never more necessary than now to use the world 
as not abusing it. To abuse it gracefully is the 
temptation of the age—and to gild the abuse with 
philanthropy. The philanthropy of the Gospel 
without its philotheism is popular. But its philan- 
thropy will never live without its philotheism, any more 
than the form of a church will live without the spirit. 

To say “Christianity is not a Theology” is in | 
one sense true, because Christianity is a Life. But 
it would be just as true to say Christianity is-not a 
History, or Christianity is not a worship. But you 
cannot have the Life without the Worship, without 
the History, or without the Theology. The spiritual 
life is the Life of God. As material life has its 
science of Biology, so has spiritual life its science of 
Theology. Without Theology, Christian Life will 
have no intellectual, no spiritual expression, as with- 
out Worship it will have no emotional expression, 
without History no continuous development. Intel- 
lectual expression is necessary to the Propagation 
and so to the Permanence of the Faith. To know 
it is the profession of the clergyman, and the most 
living interest of the cultured layman. 

Let us, the whole world over, where the common 
speech is spoken, the common prayer prayed, the 

240 Lambeth Conference of τ888. ᾿ 

Scripture open, keep touch with each other, firm, 
inseparable—find all the points of contact that we 
can honestly with them that are in a way separate ; 
yet not risk our greater unity for the sake of smaller 

To me it seems no fancy— it is none I trust to you 
—that the triple voice we have caught to-night is the 
very harmony that swells on our inner ear from roof 
and aisle and sanctuary. Here where the historic 
past “lives in the living present;” here, where 
greatest, best, and sweetest are honoured so in death 
that in a parable their shadow may fall on some οἵ. 
us ; here, where in never pausing procession sweep 
onward Parliaments of Law, Councils of Faith, 
Divine Orators, princely marriages, funerals with 
sorrow of nations, commemorations, consecrations, 
coronations—the Jubilee with its beloved Queen, its 
lost Emperor ; here, where Edward the Confessor 
bids Englishmen and English tribes never forget 
that the ideal State is the Church, and the ideal 
Church is the State, here, methinks, we well may lay 
to heart this threefold voice. 

Strong central forces: how infinitely greater their 
operation and their impulse, than if distributed into 
the most symmetric minor nuclei. Their very power | 
to attract, to move, to lift, to quicken, is their own 

Again. How we learn from this great Abbey the 
value of organizations that lie off the direct line of 
action. It is the grandest organic centre, yet it 
stands detached, favouring, labouring for every good 
cause, yet freely on its own account. Differing even 
in plan and structure radically from every sanctuary 
in the land, it is the symbol of all those forces which 
work not subordinated but in alliance. It confirms 
by separateness. 

Once more. No soul was ever lowered by the 
sight of this wondrous fabric into material thoughts. 
No man ever failed to see, read, hear its witnesses to 

Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 241 

things spiritual. From mysterious triforium to 
roadside porch “the stone cries out of the wall, and 
the beam of the timber answers it; ‘Put not your 
trust in man, nor in any child ot man.’ ‘Come up 
here, and I will show thee things that must be 
hereafter.’ ” 

And-is not this the very auditory that is tuned 
to the key of this house of power and _ holiness. 
From zones which the Roman Seer declared could 
never help or heed each other come the chiefs of the 
Church to consult in one love for the welfare of all 
men,—how they may “make all men see” the 
intellectual, the spiritual light of the world, and the 
perfect law of liberty. Lightly borne across barriers 
which he said “No Name could ever overleap,” they 
cume with no strength no pretension of their own ; 
but in the strength of One Name to which every 
knee shall bow, a strength perfected in our weakness. 

May we catch the inspiration of the hour, the 
place, the Name. Then may we work out our work ; 
strengthen our centres of force ; throw out organi- 
sations which will penetrate society, poor and great ; 
flood every corner of our house with spiritual light ; 
have nothing cold and “no part dark,’—* the whole 
body full of light” and. of warm blood. This 
is the very hope set before us, that we “ may grow 
into Him in all things, which is the Head—even 

No. XXIX. (See page 42.) 

. Sermon preached by Bishop Whipple, of Minnesota, 
in Lambeth Palace Chapel, on Tuesday, July 
3, 1888. 

Most Reverend and Right Reverend Brethren,— 
No assembly is fraught with such awful responsibility 
to God as acouncil of the Bishops of His Church. 

242 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

Since the Holy Spirit presided in the first council of 
Jerusalem, faithful souls have looked with deep 
interest to the deliberations of those whom Christ 
has made the shepherds of His flock, and to whom 
He gave His promise, “ Lo, I am with you always to 
the end of the world.” The responsibility is greater 
when division has marred the beauty of the Lamb’s 
Bride. Our words and acts will surely hasten or 
(which God forbid) retard the reunion of Christen- 
dom. Feeling the grave responsibility which is 
imposed on me to-day, my heart cries out as did the 
prophet’s, “1 ama child and cannot speak.” Pray for 
me, venerable brethren, that God may help me to 
obey His word—‘“ Whatsoever I command, that shalt 
thou speak.” I would kneel with you at our Master’s 
feet and pray that “the Holy Spirit may guide us 
in all truth.’ We meet as the representatives of 
national Churches; each with its own peculiar re- 
sponsibility to God for the souls intrusted to its care ; 
each with all the rights of a national Church, to 
adapt itself to the varying conditions of human 
society ; and each bound to preserve the order, the 
faith, the sacraments, and the worship of the Catholic 
Church, for which it is a trustee. As we kneel by 
the table of our common Lord we remember 
separated brothers. Division has multiplied division 
until infidelity sneers at Christianity as an effete 
superstition, and the modern Sadducee, more bold 
than his Jewish brother, denies the existence of God. 
Millions for whom Christ died have not so much as 
heard that there is a Saviour. It will heal no divi- 
sion to say, Who is at fault? The sin of schism does 
not lie at one door. If one has sinned by self-will, 
the other has sinned as deeply by lack of charity and 
love. The way to reunion looks difficult. To man 
it isimpossible. No human eirenicon can bridge the 
gulf of separation. There are unkind words to be 
taken back, alienations to be healed, and _heart- 
burnings to be forgiven. When we are blind, 

Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 243 

God can make away. When “the God of Peace” 
rules in all Christian hearts, our Lord’s prayer will 
be answered—*“ That they all may be one, as Thou, 
Father, art in Me, and I in Thee that they all may 
be one in Us, that the world may believe that thou 
hast sent Me.” No one branch of the Church is 
absolutely by itself alone the Catholic Church; all 
branches need reunion in order to the completeness 
of the Church. There are blessed signs that the 
Holy Spirit is quickening Christian hearts to seek 
for unity. We all know that this divided Christianity 
cannot conquer the world. At atime when every 
form of error and sin is banded together to oppose 
the kingdom of Christ, the world needs the witness 
of a united Church. Men must hear again the voice 
which peals through the lapse of centuries bearing 
witness to “ the faith once delivered to the saints,” or 
else for many souls there will be only rationalism 
and unbelief—while this sad, weary world, so full of 
sin and sorrow, is pleading for help, it is a wrong to 
Christ and to the souls for whom He died that His 
children should be separated in rival folds. As 
baptized into Christ we are brothers. Notwithstand- 
ing the hedges of human opinions which men have 
builded in the garden of the Lord, all who look for 
salvation alone through faith in Jesus Christ do hold © 
the great verities of Divine faith. The opinions 
which separate us are not necessary to be believed in 
order to salvation. The truths in which we agree 
are parts of the Catholic faith. The Holy Spirit has 
passed over these human barriers, and set his seal to 
the labours of separated brethren in Christ, and 
rewarded them in the salvation of many precious 
souls. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the 
renewing and sanctifying influences of the Holy 
Ghost are the same in the peasant in the cottage and 
in the emperor on the throne. They share with us 
in the long line of confessors and martyrs for Christ. 
We would not rob them of one sheaf which they 

244 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

have gathered in the garner of the Lord. We rejoice 
that Churches with a like historic lineage with us are 
seeking reunion, Churches whose faith has been 
dimmed by coldness or clouded by errors are being 
quickened into new life from the Incarnate Son 
of God. 

Our hearts go out in loving sympathy to the 
Old Catholics of Europe and America, whose names 
always will be linked with Selwyn, Wilberforce, and 
Wordsworth, Whittingham, Kerfoot, and Brown, in 
defence of the faith. It is with deep sorrow that we 
remember that the Church of Rome has separated 
herself from the teaching of the primitive Church by 
additions to the faith once delivered to the saints, 
and by claiming for its Bishop prerogatives which 
belong only to the Divine Head of the Church. 
While we honour the devotion and zeal of her mis- 
sionary heroes, and rejoice at the good work of 
multitudes of her children, we lament that lack of 
charity which anathematises disciples of Christ who 
have carried the Gospel to the ends of the earth. 

We bless God’s Holy Name for the fraternal 
work which has been carried on under the guidance 
of the see of Canterbury, and which we trust will 
lead ancient Churches toa deeper personal faith in 
Jesus Christ. 

We are sad that some of our kinsmen in Christ, 
children of one mother, have forsaken her ways. 
God can over-rule even this sorrow, so that it shall 
fall out to the furtherance of the Gospel. They 
must take with them precious memories of the love 
and the faith of the mother whom they have for- 
saken, and of the liberty wherewith the truth in 
Christ has made her children free—under God these 
may be a link in the chain of His providence to the 
restoration of unity. It is a ‘singular providence 
that at this period of the world’s history, when mar- 
vellous discoveries have united the people of divers 
tongues in common interests, He has placed the 

Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 245 

Anglo-Saxon race in the forefront of the nations. 
They are carrying civilisation to the ends of the 
earth. They are bringing liberty to the oppressed, 
elevating the down-trodden, and are giving to all these 
divers tongues and kindreds their customs, traditions, 
and laws. I reverently believe that the Anglo- 
Saxon Church has been preserved by God’s Provi- 
dence (if her children will accept this Mission) to 
heal the divisions of Christendom, and lead on in His 
work to be done in the eventide of the world. She 
holds the truths which underlie the possibility of re- 
union, the validity of all Christian baptism in the Name 
of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. She 
administers the two sacraments of Christ as of per- 
petual obligation, and makes faith in Jesus Christ, 
as contained in the Catholic Creed, a condition of 
Christian fellowship. The Anglo-Saxon Church 
does not perplex men with theories and shibboleths 
which many a poor Ephraimite cannot speak— 
she believes in God the Father Almighty, Maker of 
heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, 
and in the Holy Ghost, three Persons and one God, 
but she does not weaken faith in the Triune God 
by human speculations about the Trinity in Unity. 
She believes that. the sacred Scriptures were written 
by inspiration of God, but she has no theory about 
inspiration. She holds up the Atonement of Christ 
as the only hope of a lost world; but she has no 
philosophy about the Atonement. She teaches that 
it is through the Holy Ghost that men are united to 
Christ. She ministers the sacraments appointed by 
Christ as His channels of grace; but she has no 
theory to explain the manner of Christ’s presence to 
penitent believing souls. She does not explain what 
God has not explained, but celebrates these Divine 
mysteries, as they were held and celebrated for 
one thousand years after our Lord ascended into 
heaven, before there was any East or West arrayed 
against each other in the Church of God. Surely 

246 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

we may and ought to be first to hold up the olive- 
branch of peace over strife, and say, “Sirs, ye are 
brethren.” ; 

In so grave a matter as the restoration of organic 
unity, we may not surrender anything which is of 
Divine authority, or accept terms of communion 
which are contrary to God’s Word. We cannot 
recognise any usurpation of the rights and preroga- 
tives of national Churches which have a common 
ancestry, lest we “heal the hurt of the daughter of 
my people slightly,’ and say “ peace where there is 
no peace;” but we do say that all which is temporary 
and of human choice or preference we will forego 
from our love to our own kinsmen in Christ. 

The Church of the Reconciliation will be an 
historical and Catholic Church in its ministry, its 
faith, and its sacraments. It will inherit the promises 
of its Divine Lord. It will preserve all which is 
Catholic and Divine. It will adopt and use all in- 
strumentalities of any existing organisation which 
will aid it in doing the Lord’s work. It will put 
away all which is individual, narrow, and sectarian. 
It will concede to all who hold the faith all the 
liberty wherewith Christ hath made His children 

Missions.—In the presence of brethren who bear 
-in their bodies the marks of the Lord Jesus, I hardly 
know how toclothe in words my thoughts as I speak 
of Missions. The providence of God has broken | 
down impenetrable barriers—the doors of hermit 
nations have been opened ; commerce has bound 
men in common interests, and so prepared “a high- 
way for our God”—Japan, India, China, Africa, 
Polynesia, amid the solitudes of the icy north, and in 
the lands of tropic suns, world-wide there are signs 
of the coming of the kingdom of Jesus Christ. The 
veil which has so long blinded the eyes of the ancient 
people, our Lord’s kinsmen according to the flesh, is 
being taken away. We bless God for the good 

Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 247 

example of martyrs like Patteson, Mackenzie, Parker, 
Hannington, and others, who have laid down their 
lives for the Lord Jesus. We rejoice that our branch 
of the Church has been counted worthy to add to 
the names of those who “came out of great tribula- 
tion, and have washed their robes and made them 
white in the blood of the Lamb.” “A great and 
effectual door is opened.” There is no country on 
the earth where we may not carry the Gospel. The 
wealth of the world is largely in Christian hands. 
The Church only needs faith to grasp the opportu- 
nity to do the work. 

In the presence of fields so white for the harvest, 
we must ask, “Lord what wilt Thou have me to do?” 

1. There must be unceasing, prevailing intercessory 
prayer for those whom we send out to heathen 
lands. The hearts of all Christian nations were 
turned with anxious solicitude to that brave servant 
of God and his country in Khartoum. Shall we 
feel less for the servants of Christ who have given 
up home and country to suffer and it may be to die 
for Him? Someof us remember that when Missions 
were destroyed, when clouds were all around us, and 
the very ground drifted from under our feet, that we 
were made brave to work and wait for the salvation 
of God by the prayers which went up to God for us. 
When “prayers were made without ceasing of the 
Church unto God,” the fast-closed doors of the prison 
were opened for the Apostle. It will be so again. 

2. There must be the entire consecration of all 
unto Christ. The wisdom of Paul and the eloquence 
of Apollos may plant, but “God alone giveth the 
increase.’ If success comes, if “the rod of the 
priesthood bud and blossom and bear fruit,” it must 
be “laid up in the ark of God.” He will not give His 
glory to another. The work is Christ’s. “We are 
ambassadors for Him.” “I have chosen you and 
siege you that ye should go and bring forth 

248 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

3. They who would win souls must have a ripe 
knowledge of the sacred Scriptures. “They were 
written by inspiration of God ... . that the man of 
God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all 
good works.” Our orders may be unquestioned, our 
doctrine perfect in every line and feature, but we 
shall not reach the hearts of men unless we preach 
Christ out of an experimental knowiedge of the 
truths of Divine Revelation. There is but one Book 
which can bring light to homes of sorrow, one light 
to scatter clouds and darkness, one message to lead 
wandering folk unto God. This blessed Book will 
be to every weary soldier and lonely missionary 
what it was to Livingstone dying alone in Africa, or 
to Captain Gardiner dead on the desolate shores of 
Patagonia, whose finger pointed to the words, “ The 
blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin.” 

4. We must love all whom Christ loves. We 
may have the gift of teaching, we may understand 
all mysteries, we may have all knowledge, we may 
bestow all our goods to the poor, we may even give 
our bodies to be burned, but without that love which 
comes alone from Christ, we shall be “as sounding 
brass and a tinkling cymbal.” With St. Paul we 
must say, “ Whereinsoever Christ is preached I do 
rejoice, and will rejoice.” © 

5. Above all gifts we need the baptism of the 
Holy Ghost. When ¢4zs consecration comes there 
will be no cry of an empty treasury. We shall no 
longer be weary with the bleating of lost sheep, to 
whom we have to say, I have no means and no 
shepherd to send you. 

Christian Work.--We rejoice at every sign that 
Christians realise that wealth is a sacred trust, for 
which they shall give an account. We rejoice more 
that they are giving that personal service which is a 
law of His Kingdom. Men and women of culture 
and gentle birth are going into the abodes of sickness 
and sorrow to comfort stricken homes and lead 

Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 249 

sinful folk to the Saviour. Brotherhoods, sisterhoods, 
and deaconesses are multiplying. Never was there 
greater need for their holy work. Many of our own 
baptized children have drifted away from all faith. 
To thousands God is a name, the Bible a tradition, 
faith an opinion, and heaven and hell fables. But 
that which gives us the deepest sadness and makes 
all Christian work more difficult is that so many of 
those to whom the people look for example have. 
given up the Bible, the Lord’s Day, the house of 
God, and Christian faith. Alas! they are telling 
these weary toilers whose lives are clouded by anxiety 
and sorrow that there is no hereafter. “ They know 
not what they do.” They are sowing to the wind and 
will reap the whirlwind. May God show them the 
danger before it is too late. he loss of faith is the 
loss of everything; without it morality becomes 
prudence or imprudence. When the tie which bends 
man to God is broken all other ties snap asunder. 
No nation has survived the loss of its religion. We 
are appalled at the mad cry of anarchy which 
tramples all which we hold dear for time and eternity 
under its feet. We cannot look into its face without 
seeing the lineaments of that man of sin who 
“opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is 
called God and worshipped.” Antichrist is he who 
usurps the place of Christ. “ He is antichrist who 
denieth the Father and the Son.” Our hearts go 
out in pity for those whose mechanical ideas of the 
universe may be ἃ revolt from a mechanical 
theology which has lost sight of the Fatherhood 
of God. We stand where two ways meet. We 
shall take care of the people or the people will take 
care of us. The people are the rulers ; the power of 
the future is in their hands. Limit their horizon to 
this life, let penury, sickness, and sorrow change the 
man toa wolf, let him know no God and Father 
Who hears his cry, no Saviour to help, no brother to 
bind up his wounds, let there be on the one side 

250 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

wealth and luxury and wanton waste, and on the 
other side poverty, misery, and despair—there will 
be, as there has been, acry for blood. We wonder why 
men pass by the Church to found clubs and brother- 
hoods and orders. They will have them, and they 
ought to have them, until the Church is in its Divine 
love what its Founder designed it to be—the brother- 
hood in Christ of the children of our God and 
Father. What the world needs to-day is not alms, 
not hospitals, not homes of mercy alone. It needs 
the spirit and the power of the love of Christ. It 
needs the voice, the ear, the hand, and the heart of 
Christ seen in and working in His children. No 
powers of government, no prestige of social position, 
no prerogatives of Churchly authority can meet the 
issues of this hour ; we have waited already too long. 
Brotherhood men will have, and it will be the brother- 
hood of the commune, or brotherhood in Christ as 
the children of our God and Father. Infidelity 
answers no questions, heals no wounds, fulfils no hopes. 
The Gospel will do, is doing, to-day what it has done 
through all the ages, leading men out of sin and. 
darkness and despair to the liberty of sons of God. 
In a day of division and unrest there will be 
many questions which perplex earnest souls. Some 
will dwell on the subjective side of the faith, others 
will think most of its manifestations in the life. 
These questions will affect organisation for Christian 
work, public worship, and find expression in the 
ritual of the Church. There is no room for differences 
if Christ be first, Christ be last, and Christ in every- 
thing. The ritual of the Church must be the expres- 
sion of her life. It must symbolise her faith ; it must 
be subject to her authority. As the years go by 
worship will be more beautiful. The “garments of 
the king’s daughter may be of wrought gold,” and she 
“clothed in raiment of needlework,” but “she will 
have a name that she liveth and is dead,” unless her 
“fine linen is the righteousness of the saints.” Lastly, 

Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 251 

to none is this council so dear as to those whose lives 
are spent in the darkness of heathenism, or who have 
gone out to new lands to lay foundations for the 
work of the Church of God. In loneliness, with 
deferred hopes, neglected by brethren, your only 
refuge to cry as a child to God, it is a joy for you to 
feel the beating of a brother’s heart, and hear the 
music of a brother’s voice, and kneel with brothers 
at the dear old trysting-place, the table of our Lord. 
Let us consecrate all we have and are to Him, 
let us remember loved ones far away, let us gather 
all the work we have so long garnered in our hearts 
and lay it at His feet. We shall not have met in vain 
if out of the love learned of Him we give each to 
other, and to all fellow-labourers for Him, a brother’s 
love, a brother’s sympathy, and a brother’s prayers. _ 
I donot know how to clothe in words the thronging 
memories which cluster around us in this holy place, 
what searchings of heart, what cries to God, what 
communions with Christ, what consolations of the 
Holy Spirit have been witnessed in this sacred place. 
I cannot call over the long roll of saints, confessors, 
and martyrs, whose “names are written in the Lamb’s 
Book of Life.” Two names will be remembered to-day 
by us all. One, that gentle Archbishop Longley, who 
in the greatness of his love saw with a prophet’s eye the 
Mission of the Church, and planned these conferences 
that our hearts might beat as one in the battle of the 
last time. The other, the wisest of counsellors and 
the most loving of brethren, the great-hearted Arch- 
bishop Tait, whose dying legacy to his brethren was 
“love one another.” They have finished their course 
and entered into rest. A little more work,a few more 
trials, and we, too, shall finish our course. We are 
not two companies, the militant and triumphant are 
one. We are the advance and rear of one host 
travelling to the Canaan of God’s rest. God grant 
that we, too, may so follow Christ that we may have 
an abundant entrance to His eternal kingdom. 

252 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

No. XXX. (See page 45.) 

Address to the Queen. Signed by the Bishops present 
at the Third Lambeth Conference, July, 1888. 

May it please Your Majesty, 

We, Archbishops and Bishops, gathered together 
at Lambeth from every part of Your Majesty’s 
Dominions, from the United States of America, and 
from Mission Fields in all quarters of the World, 
desire respectfully to convey to Your Majesty an 
assurance of the earnest prayer which we offer to 
Almighty God, through our Lord and Saviour Jesus 
Christ, that health, peace, and prosperity may rest 
upon Your Majesty,and upon every Member of Your 
Royal House. 

Met as we are, in the Providence of God, to con- 
sider how we may best promote among men an 
increase of the Christian Faith, of brotherly kindness, 
of honesty and pureness of life, and of reverence for 
all that is good, we would express to Your Majesty 
our grateful sense of the debt which we owe to the 
beneficent influence of Your Majesty’s Court and 
Home during the fifty years of a great and glorious 

In thanking God for the rapid and continuous 
extension of the Anglican Church in Your Majesty's 

Address to the Queen. 253 

Kingdom and Empire, and in the vast Continent of 
America, we cannot forget the constant evidence 
which has been given of Your Majesty’s earnest sym- 
pathy with all efforts to promote whatsoever things 
are true and pure and of good report, or tend to 
advance among the nations of the earth the Kingdom 
of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. 

We are well assured that Your Majesty unites with 
us in thanksgivings to Almighty God for the progress 
already vouchsafed to His Church on earth, and in 

continued prayer for the Divine blessing. 

Edw. Cantuar. 

W. Ebor. 

R. Armagh. 

Plunket Dublin. 

F. Londin. 

J. Fredericton. 

Edward R. Calcutta. 

R. Rupertsland. 

W. P. Guiana. 

W. W. Capetown. 

Alfred Sydney. 

J. B. Dunelm. 

J. Hereford. 

H. A. Neely (Maine). 

H. Carlisle. 

C. P. Meath. 

Jno. Moosonee. 

William Stevens 
Bishop of Iowa. 

E. H. Winton. 

W. Basil St. Davids. 

Allan B. Grahamstown. 


George H. North Queensland. 

J. M. Rangoon. 

R. Llandaff. 

W. C. Peterborough. 
G. Columbia. 
Maurice S. Huron. 

John Mitchinson, Bp. 

William Derry & Raphoe. 

Chas. M. Clogher. 

H. B. Whipple, 

L. G. Bombay. 

R. S. Colombo. 

E. Dover. 

C. J. Gloucester and Bristol. 

E. Lincoln. 

J. M. Trav. and Cochin. 

Wm. B. Killaloe. 

A. Colchester. 

John Sarum. 

J. J. Penrith. 

Alfred Marlborough. 

Alwyne Ely. 

E. G. Sierra Leone. 

Robert S. Cork. 

Samuel Kilmore. 

G. F. Popham Blyth, Bishop 
in Jerusalem and the East. 

Cyprian Saskatchewan and 

J. C. Bangor. 

E. Jamaica. 

Andrew Burn Nelson, N.Z. 

ἘΝ H. Exon. 

Bishop of 


F. Nova Scotia. 

Edw. Bickersteth, Bishop ἃ in 

Charles P. Scott, Bishop in 
North China. 

C. W. Gibraltar. 

J. Manchester. 

W. T. T. Brisbane. 

Edward C. Waiapu. 

W. D. Lichfield. 

C. J. Branch, Bishop Coadj. 

W. Kenneth Maritzburg. 

William Hobart Hare, Bishop 
of S. Dakota. 

H. Barbados. 

S. T. Dunedin. 

W. W. Antigua. 

G. W. Adelaide. 

Cortlandt Whitehead, Pitts- 

O. W. Whitaker, Bishop of 

T. B. Lyman, Bishop of N. 

B. Wistar Morris, Bishop of 

W. E. McLaren, Bishop of 

John T. Spalding, Bishop of 

John Scarborough, Bishop of 
New Jersey. 

W. G. Rulison, Assistant Bis- 
hop, Central Pennsylvania. 

S. A. Crowther, Bishop of 
Niger Territory. 

Benj. H. Paddock, Bishop of 

Alexander Burgess, Bishop of 

C. A. Smythies, Bishop of the 
Universities’ Mission to 
Central Africa. 

A. G. Aberdeen and Orkney. 

Alex. Bishop of Argyll and 
the Isles. 

J. Edenburgen. 

Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

John A. Paddock, Bishop of 
Washington Territory. 

Charles Perry (Bishop). 

A. W. Roffen. 

Hugh W. Brechin, Primus. 

Bishop Coad. of London, for 
N. and C. Europe. 

W. Cestr. 

C. H. Bromby, Bishop. 

Maurice N. Cashel. 

F. Cramer Roberts, Assistant 
Bishop of Manchester. 

F. H. Leicester. 

D. B. Knickerbacker, Bishop 
of Indiana, U.S.A. 

H. B. Pretoria. 

E. Algoma. 

James, Bishop of Moray and 

E. R. Newcastle. 

Charles Niagara. 

H. Tully, Coadjutor of 

Charles Limerick. 

Arthur Toronto. 

Arthur C. Bath and Wells. 

Wm. D. Walker, Bishop of 
North Dakota. 

J. W. Quebec. 

R. Cicestr. 

George F. Seymour, Bishop 
of Springfield, U.S.A. 

Waite H. Falkland Islands. 

William Garden, Bishop of 
Auckland, N.Z. 

G. M. Singapore & Sarawak. 

Thomas A. Starkey, Bishop of 

E. R. Tufnell, Bishop. 

George H. Truron. 

George Southwell. 

Adelbert, Bishop of Qu’Ap- 

Wm. Croswell Doane, Bishop | 
of Albany. 

H. C. Potter, Bishop of New 

R. C. Bedford. 

Her Majesty's Answer to Address. 255 

Bransby, Bishop of S. John, Douglas, Bishop for Zululand. 
Kaff. Dan. J. Tuttle, Bishop of 

Wm. Walsham Wakefield. Missouri. 

R. Caledonia. Llewellyn Newfoundland. 

A. W. New Westminster. W. B. Ripon. 

Hugh Miller Thompson, William P. Ossory. 
Bishop of Mississippi. J. T. Ontario. 

Alfred Honolulu. J. St. Asaph. 

William Paret, Bishop of Hy. N. Pierce, Arkansas. 
Maryland. E. Nottingham. 

27th July, 1888. 

The following is Her Majesty's answer to the above 
Address, forwarded by the Secretary of State 
to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, “ for 
communication to the Most Reverend and right 
Reverend Prelates who signed the address :”— 

“T have received with much gratification the 
address of the recent meeting held at Lambeth, of 
Archbishops and Bishops of the Church of England, 
and of Churches in communion therewith in various 
parts of my dominions, in the United States of 
America, and in other foreign countries, on the sub- 
ject of the continuous extension of such Churches 
throughout the course of my reign. 

“1 thank you heartily for your expressions of good 
will towards my Throne and person. 

“You may be assured that it will ever be my 
anxious desire to promote all measures which may 
tend to maintain and extend the spirit of true religion, 
and I earnestly pray that Almighty God may bless 
your labours for an increase of Christian faith and of 
the virtues which it inspires in all quarters of the world. 


256 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

No. XXXI. 



[With the exception of Metropolitans and others entitled to special 
precedence, the Bishops are arranged, in the following list, according to 

the date of their consecration. | 




BisHorp PERRY i “i 



BISHOP OF QUEBEC... τὸς vee 

25th April, 1877. 

15th December, 1861. 
Ist May, 1849. 

10th December, 1876. 

24th August, 1842. 
4th May, 1845. 

24th June, 1865. 

28th October, 1871. 
17th May, 1874. 

30th November, 1876. 
Ist January, 1884. 

21st December, 1869. 
25th April, 1879. 
29th March, 1864. 
29th June, 1847. 
25th January, 1853. 
τ June, 1857. 

a 24th February, 1859. 

14th June, 1859. 
14th June, 1859. 
13th October, 1859. 
17th May, 1860. 
25th March, 1862. 
25th March, 1863. 
21st June, 1863. 
29th June, 1864. 
29th June, 1864. 

List of Bishops attenaing the Conference. 257 

. BIsHoP 





OF MAINE -.... 

oF MIssouRI 


OF DERRY ... 3 

OF OREGON... as 















ΟΕ ST. DaAvIp’s 














4th January, 1865. 
11th October, 1865. 
29th June, 1866. 

24th August, 1866. 
25th January, 1867. 
Ist May, 1867. 

IIth June, 1867. 

24th August, 1867. 
13th October, 1867. 
24th June, 1868. 

15th November, 1868, 
3rd December, 1868. 
25th January, 1869. 
2nd February, 1869. 
29th June, 1869. 

13th October, 1869. 
30th November, 1869. 
21st December, 1869. 
21st December, 1869. 
25th January, 1870. 
25th March, 1870. 
8th May, 1870. 

8th May, 1870. 

8th May, 1870. 

30th November, 1870. 
4th June, 1871. 

2nd February, 1872. 
13th April, 1872. 
29th June, 1872. 

15th December, 1872. 
oth January, 1873. 
24th June, 1873. 

17th September, 1873. 
11th December, 1873. 
31st December, 1873. 
Ist February, 1874. 
24th August, 1874. 
25th October, 1874. 
2nd February, 1875. 
30th March, 1875 

8th December, 1875. 
28th December, 1875. 
Ist May, 1876. 

roth September, 1876. 
22nd October, 1876. 
25th June, 1877. 

21st December, 1877. 
Ist January, 1878. 

2nd February, 1878. 
1st May, 1878. 

15th May, 1878. 

11th June, 1878. 





Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

OF OssorRY ... ἘΝ ‘ 
































24th June, 1878. 

24th June, 1878. 

24th June, 1878. 

29th September, 1878. 
Ist May, 1879. 

2sth July, 1879. 

25th July, 1879. 

25th July, 1879. 

17th September, 1879. 
1st November, 1879. 
8th January, 1880. 
11th June, 1880. 

28th October, 1880. 
28th October, 1880. 
30th November, 1880. 
15th December, 1880.. 
26th May, 1881. 

1oth July, 1881. 

25th January, 1882. 
ist May, 1882. 

Ist May, 1882. 

24th June, 1882. 

29th June, 1882. 

25th July, 1882. 

27th July, 1882. 

30th November, 1882. 
24th February, 1883. 
24th February, 1883. 
25th April, 1883. 
25th April, 1883. 

Ist May, 1883. 

12th August, 1883. 
24th August, 1883. 
14th October, 1883. 
20th October, 1883 
30th November, 1883. 
30th November, 1883. 
20th December, 1883. 
24th February, 1884. 
25th April, 1884. 

25th April, 1884. 

Ist May, 1884. 

24th June, 1884. 

25th July, 1884. 

28th October, 1884. 
8th January, 1885. 
25th April, 1885. 

25th April, 1885. 

Ist May, 1885. 

11th June, 1885. 

29th September, 1885. 
28th October, 1885. 

List of Bishops attending the Conference. 259 










2nd February, 1886. 
2nd February, 1886. 
24th February, 1886. 
29th June, 1886. 
21st September, 1886. 
23th March, 1887. 
7th August, 1887. 
24th August, 1887. 
24th February, 1888. 
24th February, 1888. 
25th April, 1388. 
22nd May, 1888. 
15th July, 1888. 

15th July, 1888. 

260 Lambeth Conference, 1888. 









BisHop oF ST. ASAPH (RT. REV. Dr. HUGHEs). 

BisHoPp OF ST. DaAvips (Rt. REv. Dr. BASIL JONEs). 







BisHoP OF ELy (Rt. REv. Lorp A. Compton). 








List of Bishops attending the Conference. 261 




BisHor OF RIpoNn (RT. Rev. Dr. Boyp CARPENTER). 

BisHop OF MEATH (Most Rev. Dr. REICHEL). 




BIsHOP OF Ossory (RT. Rev. DR. WALSH). 



BisHop op MorRAY AND Ross (RT. REv. Dr. KELLY). 




BisHOP OF OREGON (RT. Rev. Dr. Morris). 



BIsHOP OF SouTH DAKOTA (RT. REv. Dr. Hare). 



Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

OF Iowa (RT. Rev. Dr. STEVENS-PARRY). 
OF Quincy (RT. Rev. DR. BURGESS). 



OF NEW YorkK (RT. εν, DR. POTTER). 

oF NorTH DaAkoTA (RT. REv. Dr. WALKER). 









OF FREDERICTON (RT. REv. Dr. MEDLEY), AZetropolitan. 






OF Nova Scoria (Rr. Rev. Dr. COURTNEY). 

OF CALCUTTA (RT. Rev. Dr. JOHNSON), Metropolitan). 



OF GUIANA (RT. Rev. Dr. AusTIN), Metropolitan. 




oF NassAu (RT. Rev. Dr. CHURTON). 


OF SYDNEY (RT. Rev. Dr. BARRY), Metropolitan. 



: (wii 

List of Bishops attending the Conference. 263 

BisHoP OF CAPETOWN (RT. REv. Dr. W. W. JONEs), Metropolitan. 




BisHop OF ST. JOHN’S, KAFFRARIA (RT. Rev. Dr. Key). 



BisHor OF COLUMBIA (RT. Rev. Dr. HILts),. 


asanoe. CROWTHER). 












East (Rt. Rev. Dr. BLYTH). 

Officers of {he Conference. 

Episcopal Secretary. 

DEAN OF WINDSOR (VERY REv. R. T. DAviIpson), General 


264 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

No. XXXIII. (See page 45.) 

E neyclical Letter issued by the Bishops attending the 
third Lambeth Conference, July, 1888. 



We, Archbishops, Bishops Metropolitan, and 
other Bishops of the Holy Catholic Church, in full 
communion with the Church of England, one hun- 
dred and forty-five in number, all having superinten- 
dence over Dioceses or lawfully commissioned to 
exercise Episcopal functions therein, assembled from 
divers parts of the earth, at Lambeth Palace, in 
the year of our Lord 1888, under the presidency of 
the Most Reverend Edward, by Divine Providence 
Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of All England 
and Metropolitan, after receiving in the Chapel of 
the said Palace the Blessed Sacrament of the Lord’s 
Body and Blood, and uniting in prayer for the 
guidance of the Holy Spirit, having taken into con- 
sideration various questions which have been sub- 
mitted to us affecting the welfare of God’s people 
and the condition of the Church in divers parts of 
the World, | 

We have made these matters the subject of careful 
and serious deliberation during the month past, both 
in general Conference and in Committees specially 
appointed to consider the several questions; and we 
now commend to the faithful the conclusions at 
which we have arrived. 

We have appended to this letter two sets of docu- 
ments, the one containing the formal Resolutions of 
the Conference, and the other the Reports of the 
several Committees. We desire you to bear in mind 

Encyclical Letter of 1888. 265 

that the Conference is responsible for the first alone. 
The Reports of Committees can only be taken to 
represent the mind of the Conference in so far as they 
are reaffirmed or directly adopted in the Resolutions ; 
but we have thought good to print these Reports, 
believing that they will offer fruitful matter for 

In the first place we desire to speak of the moral 
and practical questions which have engaged the 
attention of the Conference ; and in the forefront we 
would place the duty of the Church in the promotion 
of temperance and purity. 

Temperance. Noble and self-denying efforts have 
been made for many years, within and without the 
Church, for the suppression of intemperance, and it 
is our earnest hope that these efforts will be increased 
manifold. The evil effects of this sin on the life of the 
Church and the nation can scarcely be exaggerated. 
But we are constrained to utter a caution against a 
false principle which threatens to creep in and vitiate 
much useful work. Highly valuable as we believe 
total abstinence to be as a means to an end, we 
desire to discountenance the language which con- 
demns the use of wine as wrong in itself, indepen- 
dently of its effects on ourselves or on others, and 
we have expressed our disapproval of a reported 
practice (which seems to be due to some extent to 
the tacit assumption of this principle) of substituting 

some other liquid in the celebration of Holy 

Purity. Qn the other hand Christian society is 
only now awakening to a sense of its active duty in 
the matter of purity; and we therefore desire to 
avail ourselves of an occasion which has brought 
together representatives of the Anglican Communion 
from distant parts of the world, to proclaim a crusade 
against that sin which is before all others a defilement 

266 Lambteh Conference of 1888. 

of the body of Christ and a desecration of the temple 
of the Holy Spirit. We recall the earnest language 
of the Report: we believe that nothing short of 
general action by all Christian people will avail to 
arrest the evil: we call upon you to rally round the 
standard of a high and pure morality ; and we appeal 
to all whom our voice may reach to assist us in 
raising the tone of public opinion, and in stamping 
out ignoble and corrupt traditions which are not only 
a dishonour to the Name of our Master Christ, but 
degrading to the dignity of a being created in the 
image of God. 

Sanctity of Marriage. In vital connection with the pro- 
motion of purity is the maintenance of the sanctity 
of marriage, which is the centre of social morality. 
This is seriously compromised by facilities of 
Divorce which have been increased in recent years 
by legislation in some countries. We have therefore 
held it our duty to reaffirm emphatically the precept 
of Christ relating thereto, and to offer some advice 
which may guide the Clergy of our Communion 
in their attitude towards any infringement of the 
Master’s rule. 

Polygamy. The sanctity of marriage as a Chris- 
tian obligation implies the faithful union of one 
man with one woman until the union is severed by 
death. The polygamous alliances of heathen races are 
allowed on all hands to be condemned by the law of 
Christ; but they present many difficult practical 
problems which have been solved in various ways in 
the past. We have carefully considered this question 
in the different lights thrown upon it from various 
parts of the mission-field. While we have refrained 
from offering advice on minor points, leaving these to 
be settled by the local authorities of the Church, we 
have laid down some broad lines on which alone we 
consider that the missionary may. safely act. Our 

Encyclical Letter of 1888. ey, 

first care has been to maintain and protect the Chris- 
tian conception of marriage, believing that any 
immediate and rapid successes which might otherwise 
_have been secured in the mission-field would be dearly 
purchased by any lowering or confusion of this idea, 

Observance of the Lord’s Day. The due observance of 
Sunday as a day of rest, of worship, and of religious 
teaching, has a direct bearing on the moral well-being 
of the Christian community. We have observed of 
-late a growing laxity which threatens to impair its 
sacred character. We strongly deprecate this ten- 
dency. We call upon the leisurely classes not 
selfishly to withdraw from others the opportunities 
of rest and of religion. We call upon master and 
employer jealously to guard the privileges of the 
servant and the workman. In “the Lord’s Day” 
-we have a priceless heritage. Whoever misuses it 
incurs a terrible responsibility. 

Socialism. .Intimately connected with these moral 
questions is the attitude of the Christian Church 
towards the social problems of the day. Excessive 
inequality in the distribution of this world’s goods: 
vast accumulation and desperate poverty side by 
side: these suggest many anxious considerations to 
any thoughtful person, who is penetrated with the 
mind of Christ. No more important problems can 
well occupy the attention—whether of Clergy or 
Laity—than such as are connected with what is popu- 
larly called Socialism. To study schemes proposed 
for redressing the social balance, to welcome the 
good which may be found in the aims or operations 
of any, and to devise methods, whether by legisla- 
tion or by social combinations, or in any other way, 
for a peaceful solution of the problems without 
violence or injustice, is one of the noblest pursuits 
which can engage the thoughts of those who strive to 
follow in the footsteps of Christ. Suggestions are 


268 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

offered in the Report which may assist in solving 
this problem. 

Care of Emigrants. One class of persons more espe- 
cially had a claim upon the consideration and 
sympathy of the Conference. In our emigrants we 
have a social link which binds the Churches of the 
British Islands to the Church of the United States, 
and to the Churches in the Colonies. No more 
pertinent question, therefore, could have been 
suggested for our deliberations than our duty 
“towards this large body of our fellow-Christians. 
It is especially incumbent upon the Church to follow 
them with the eye of sympathy at every point in 
their passage from their old home to their new, to 
exercise a watchful care over them, and to protect 
them from the dangers, moral and spiritual, which 
beset their path. We have endeavoured to offer 
some suggestions, by following which this end may 
be attained. 

| Definite Teaching of the Faith. - Recognising thus the 

primary importance of maintaining the moral pre- 
cepts and discipline of the Gospel in all the relations 
_of life and society, we proceed to the consideration 
of the means, within the reach and contemplation of 
the Churches, for inculcating the definite truths of 
the Faith, which are the basis of such moral teaching. 
τς We cannot escape the conviction that this depart- 
ment of work requires great attention and much 
improvement. The religious teaching of the young 
is sadly deficient in depth and reality, especially in 
the matter of doctrine. This deficiency is not con- 
fined to any class of society, and the task of 
remedying the default is one which the Laity must 
be prepared to share with the Clergy. On parents it 
lies as a divine charge. Godfathers and Godmothers 
should be urged to fulfil the duty which they have 
undertaken for the children whose sponsors they have 

Encyclical Letter of 1888. 269 ° 

been, and to see that they are ‘not left uninstructed, 
or inadequately prepared for Confirmation. The use 
of public catechising and regular preparation. of can- 
didates for Confirmation is capable of much develop- 
ment. The work done in Sunday Schools requires, 
as we believe, more constant supervision and more 
sustained interest than, in a great many cases, it 
receives from the Clergy. The instruction of Sunday- 
School teachers, and of the pupil-teachers in 
Elementary Schools, ought to be regarded as an in- 
dispensable part of the pastoral work of a Parish 
Priest ; and the moral and practical lessons from the 
Bible ought to be enforced by-constant reference to 
the sanctions, and to the illustrations of doctrine and 
discipline belonging to them, to be found in the same 
Holy Scripture. It would be possible, to a greater 
extent than is now done, to make sermons in church 
combine doctrinal and moral efficiency, and, by illus- 
trating the rationale of divine service, lead on the 
congregations to the perception of the definite rela- 
tions between worship, faith, and work—the lessons 
of the Prayer Book, the Catechism, and the Creeds. 

It is not, however, with reference to the young 
alone, or to the recognised members of their own 
flock, that the Clergy have need to look carefully to 
the security of definiteness in teaching the faith. 

The study of Holy Scripture is a great part of the 
mental discipline of the Christian, and the Bible it- 
self is the main instrument in all teaching of religion. 

Unhappily, in the present day, there is a wide- 
spread system of propagandism hostile to the recep- 
tion of the Bible as a treasury of Divine knowledge, 
and throughout society, in all its ranks, misgivings, 
doubts, hostile criticisms, and sceptical estimates of 
doctrinal truths as based on Revelation, are very 
common. | 

The doubts which arise from the misapprehension 
of the due relations between Science and Revelation 
may be, and ought to be, treated with respect, and a 

270%: , Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

sympathetic patience ; and, where minds have been 
disquieted by scientific discovery or assertion, great 
_ care should be taken not to extinguish the elements 
of faith, but rather to direct the thinker to the realisa- | 
tion of the fact that such discoveries elucidate the 
action of laws which, rightly conceived, tend to the 
higher appreciation of the glorious work of the 
Creator, upheld by the word of His power. 

The dangers arising from the hostile or sceptical 
temper and attitude are increased by the difficulty of 
determining how far our teaching and the popular 
acceptance of it can be harmonised with a due con- 
sideration for the views on inspiration, and especially 
on the character of the discipline of the Old Testa- 
ment dispensation, which, although they have never 
received definite sanction in the Church, have been 
long and widely prevalent. 

We must recommend to the Clergy cautious and 
industrious treatment of these points of controversy, 
and most earnestly press upon them the importance 
of taking, as the central thought of their teaching, 
our Lord Jesus Christ, as the sacrifice for our sins, as 
the healer of our sinfulness; the source of all our 
spiritual life, and the revelation to our consciences of 
the law and motive of all moral virtue. Τὸ Him and 
to His work all the teachings of the Old Testament 
converge, and from Him all the teachings of the New 
Testament flow, in spirit, in force, and in form. The 
work of the Church is the application and extension 
of the blessings of the Incarnation, and her teaching 
the development of its doctrinal issues as contained 
in the Creeds of the Church. 

Mutual Relations. Our discussion on the mutual rela- 
tions of dioceses and branches of our Communion 
has brought out some points which we desire to com- 
mend to your consideration. It appears necessary to 
draw attention to the principles laid down in the 
Conference of 1878, and to urge that within our 

Encyclical Letter of 1888. 271 

Communion the duly-certified action of each Church 
or Province should be respected by the other 
Churches and their members; that no Bishop or 
Clergyman should exercise his functions within any 
regularly-constituted diocese without the consent of 
the Bishop of that diocese; and that no Bishop 
should authorise the action of any Clergyman coming 
from another diocese without proper letters testi- 
monial. The neglect of these rules has led to some 
grievous scandals. The Bishops, on their part, are 
prepared to do their best to guard against such 
mischiefs, by adding private advice to the formal 
document in use, but the Clergy must resolve to 
exercise greater caution in signing testimonials; and 
those who require them must check all tendency to 
over-sensitiveness, when they find themselves sub- 
jected to inquiries as to character and identification, 
which, however unnecessary they may deem them in 
their own case, are certainly indispensable for securing 
such measure of safety as we require. 

This caution applies with especial. force to the 
Clergy ordained for Colonial work. We most heartily 
recognise the principle that those who have given 
the best years of their life to work abroad are entitled 
to great consideration when the time comes at which 
they want such rest or change of employment as may 
be found at home. But to lay down any general 
rules on this point is impossible. 

One matter has been laid before us in a more 
formal way—the possibility of constituting a Council 
or Councils of reference to advise upon, or even to 
decide, questions laid before them by the authorities 
of the Provinces of the Colonial Church. As to this, 
we would counsel patient consideration and consulta- 
tion, of such character as may eventually supersede 
_ the necessity for creating an authority which might, 
whether as a Council of advice, or in a function more 
closely resembling that of a Court, place .us in 
circumstances prejudicial alike to order and to liberty 
of action. 

272 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

Home Reunion. After anxious discussion we have 
resolved to content ourselves with laying down 
certain articles as a basis on which approach may be, 
by God’s blessing, made towards Home Reunion. 
These articles, four in number, will be found in the 
appended Resolutions. 

The attitude of the Anglican Communion towards 
the religious bodies now separated from it by unhappy 
divisions would appear to be this :—We hold ourselves 
in readiness to enter into brotherly conference with 
any of those who may desire intercommunion with 
us in a more or less perfect form. We lay down 
conditions on which such intercommunion is, in our 
opinion, and according to our conviction, possible. 
For, however we may long to embrace those now 
alienated from us, so that the ideal of the one flock 
under the one Shepherd may be realised, we must 
not be unfaithful stewards of the great deposit 
entrusted to us. We cannot desert our position 
either to faith or discipline. That concord would, in 
our judgment, be neither true nor desirable which 
should be produced by such surrender. 

But we gladly and thankfully recognise the real 
religious work which is carried on by Christian bodies 
not of our Communion. We cannot close our eyes 
to the visible blessing which has been vouchsafed to 
their labours for Christ’s sake. Let us not be mis- 
understood on this point. We are not insensible to 
the strong ties, the rooted convictions, which attach 
them to their present position. These we respect, as 
we wish that on our side our own principles and 
feelings may be respected. Competent observers, 
indeed, assert that not in England only, but in all 
parts of the Christian world, there is a real yearning 
for unity—that men’s hearts are moved more than 
heretofore towards Christian fellowship. The Con- 
ference has shown in its discussions as well as its 
resolutions that it is deeply penetrated with this 
feeling.. May the Spirit of love move on the troubled 
waters of religious differences. 

Encylical Letter of 1888. 273 

Relation to the Scandinavian Church. Among the nations 
with whom English-speaking peoples are brought 
directly in contact are the Scandinavian races, who 
form an important element of the population in many 
of our dioceses. The attitude, therefore, which the 
Anglican Communion should take towards the 
Scandinavian Churches could not be a matter of 
indifference to this Conference. We have recom- 
mended that fuller knowledge should be sought and 
friendly intercourse interchanged until such time as 
matters may be ripe for a closer alliance without any 
sacrifice of principles which we hold to be essential. 

To Old Catholics and Others. Nor, again, is it possible 
for members of the Anglican Communion to withhold 
their sympathies from those Continental movements 
towards reformation which, under the greatest 
difficulties, have proceeded mainly on the same lines 
as our own, retaining Episcopacy as an Apostolic 
ordinance. Though we believe that the time has not 
come for any direct alliance with any of these, and, 
though we deprecate any precipitance of action 
which would transgress primitive and_ established 
principles of jurisdiction, we believe that advances 
may be made without sacrifice of these, and we 
entertain the hope that the time may come when a 
more formal alliance with some at least of these 
bodies will be possible. 

To the Eastern Churches. The Conference has ex- 
pressed its earnest desire to confirm and to improve 
the friendly relations which now exist between the 
Churches of the East and the Anglican Communion. 
These Churches have well earned the sympathy of 
Christendom, for through long ages of persecution 
they have kept alive in many a dark place the light 
of the Gospel. If that light is here and there feeble 
or dim, there is all the more reason that we, as we 
have opportunity, should tend and cherish it ; and 

274 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

we need not fear that our offices of brotherly charity, 
if offered in a right spirit, will not be accepted. We 
reflect with thankfulness that there exist no bars, 
such as are presented to communion with the Latins 
by the formulated sanction of the Infallibility of the 
Church residing in the person of the Supreme Pontiff, 
by the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, and 
other dogmas imposed by the decrees of Papal 
Councils. The Church of Rome has always treated 
her Eastern sister wrongfully She intrudes her 
Bishops into the ancient Dioceses, and keeps up a 
system of active. proselytism. The Eastern Church 
is reasonably outraged by these proceedings, wholly 
contrary as they are to Catholic principles ; and it 
behoves us of the Anglican Communion to take care 
that we do not offend in like manner. 

Individuals craving fuller light and stronger spiri- 
tual life may, by remaining in the Church of their 
baptism, become centres of enlightenment to their 
own people. 

But though all schemes of proselytising are to be 
avoided, it is only right that our real claims and 
position as a historical Church should be set before 
a people who are very distrustful of novelty, especially 
in religion, and who appreciate the history of Catholic 
antiquity. Help should be given towards the educa- 
tion of the Clergy, and, in more destitute communi- 
ties, extended to schools for general instruction. 

Authoritative Standards. The authoritative standards ot 
doctrine and worship claim your careful attention 
in connexion with these subjects. It is of the 
utmost importance that our faith and practice should 
be represented, both to the ancient Churches and to 
the native and growing Churches in the mission-field, 
in a manner which shall neither give cause for offence 
nor restrict due liberty, nor present any stumbling- 
blocks in the way of complete communion. 

In conformity with the practice of the former 

Encyclical Letter of 1888. 27 5 

Conferences we declare that we are united under our 
Divine Head in. the fellowship of the one Catholic 
and Apostolic Church, holding the one faith revealed 
in Holy Writ, defined in the Creeds, maintained by 
the primitive Church, and affirmed by the undisputed 
CEcumenical Councils: as standards of doctrine and 
worship alike we recognise the Prayer Book with its 
Catechism, the Ordinal, and the Thirty-nine Articles, 
—the special heritage of the Church of England, and, 
to a greater or less extent, received by all the 
Churches of our Communion. 

We desire that these standards should be set before 
the foreign Churches in their purity and simplicity. 
A. certain liberty of treatment must be extended to 
the cases of native and growing Churches, on which 
it would be unreasonable to impose, as conditions of 
communion, the whole of the Thirty-nine Articles, 
᾿ coloured as they are in language and form by the 
peculiar circumstances under which they were 
originally drawn up. On the other hand, it would be 
impossible for us to share with them in the matter of 
Holy Orders, as in complete intercommunion, without 
satisfactory evidence that they hold substantially the 
same form of doctrine as ourselves. It ought not to 
be difficult, much less impossible, to formulate 
articles, in accordance with our own standards of 
doctrine and worship, the acceptance of which should 
be required of all ordained in such Churches. 

We close this letter rendering our humble and 
hearty thanks to Almighty God for His great good- 
ness towards us. We have been permitted to meet 
together in larger numbers than heretofore. Con- 
tributions of knowledge and experience have been 
poured into the common stock from all parts of the 
earth. We have realised, more fully than it was 
possible to realise before, the extent, the power, and 
the influence of the great Anglican Communion. 
We have felt its capacities, its opportunities, its 

276 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

privileges. In our common deliberations we have 
tested its essential oneness amidst all varieties of 
condition and development. Wherever there was 
diversity of opinion among us there was also har- 
mony of spirit and unity of aim ; and we shall return 
to our several dioceses refreshed, strengthened, and 
inspired by the memories which we shall carry away. 

But the sense of thanksgiving is closely linked 
with the obligation of duty. This fuller realisation 
of our privileges as Members of the Anglican Com- 
munion carries with it-a heightened sense of our 
responsibilities which do not end with our own 
people or with the mission-field alone, but extend to 
all the Churches of God. The opportunities of an 
exceptional position call us to an exceptional work. 
It is our earnest prayer that all—Clergy and laity 
alike—may take God’s manifest purpose to heart, 
and strive in their several stations to work it out in 
all its fulness. 

With these parting words we commend the results 
at which we have arrived in this Conference to your 
careful consideration, praying that the Holy Spirit 
may direct your thoughts and lead you to all truth, 
and that our counsels may redound through your 
action to the glory of God and the increase of Christ’s 

Signed, on behalf of the Conference, 

Liprscopal Secretary. 
Dean of Windsor, 
General Secretary. 
Archdeacon of Maidstone, 

Assistant Secretary. 
27th July, 1888. | 

Resolutions of the Conference of 1888. 277 

No. XXXIV. (See page 45.) 




. That this Conference, without pledging itself to all 

the statements and opinions embodied in the 
Report of the Committee on Intemperance, 
commends the Report to the consideration of 
the Church. 

. That the Bishops assembled in this Conference 

deciare that the use of unfermented juice of the 
grape, or any liquid other than true wine di- 
luted or undiluted, as the element in the 
administration of the cup in Holy Communion, 
is unwarranted by the example of Our Lord, 
and is an unauthorised departure from the 
custom of the Catholic Church. 

. That this Conference earnestly commends to all 

. (A) 

those into whose hands it may come the Re- 
port on the subject of Purity, as expressing 
the mind of the Conference on this great 

[? Carried unanimously. ] 

That, inasmuch as Our Lord’s words expressly 
forbid Divorce, except in the case of fornica- 
tion or adultery, the Christian Church cannot 

- recognise divorce in any other than the ex- 

cepted case, or give any sanction to the mar- 
riage of any person who has been divorced 
contrary to this law, during the life of the 
other party. 


Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

(B) That under no circumstances ought the guilty 

party, in the case of a divorce for fornication 
or adultery, to be regarded, during the life- 
time of the innocent party, as a fit recipient of 
the blessing of the Church on marriage. 

(c) That, recognising the fact that there always 

has been a difference of opinion in the Church 
on the question whether Our Lord meant to 
forbid marriage to the innocent party in a 
divorce for adultery, the Conference recom- 

_ mends that the Clergy should not be instructed 

5. (A) 

to refuse the Sacraments or other privileges of 
the Church to those who, under civil sanction, 
are thus married. 

That it is the opinion of this Conference that 
persons living in polygamy be not admitted 
to baptism, but that they be accepted as 
candidates and kept under Christian instruc- 
tion until such time as they shall be in a 
position to accept the law of Christ.* 

[* Carried by 83 votes to 21.] 

(B) That the wives of polygamists may, in the 

6. (A) 

opinion of this Conference, be admitted in 
some cases to baptism, but that it must be left 
to the local authorities of the Church to decide 
under what circumstances they may be bap- 

[* Carried by 54 votes to 34.] 

That the principle of the religious observance 
of one day in seven, embodied in the Fourth 
Commandment, is of Divine obligation. 

(B) That, from the time of our Lord’s Resurrec- 

tion, the first day of the week was observed by 

Resolutions of the Conference of 1888. 279 

Christians as a day of worship and rest, and, 
under the name of “The Lord’s Day,’ gra- 
dually succeeded, as the great weekly festival 
of the Christian Church, to the sacred position 
of the Sabbath. 

(c) That the observance of the Lord’s Day,asa 
day of rest, of worship, and of religious 
teaching, has been a priceless blessing in all 
Christian lands in which it has been main- 

(Ὁ) That the growing laxity in its observance 
threatens a great change in its sacred and 
beneficent character. 

(E) That especially the increasing practice, on the 
part of some of the wealthy and leisurely 
classes, of making Sunday a day of secular 
amusement is most strongly to be deprecated. 

(F) That the most careful regard should be had 
to the danger of any encroachment upon the 
rest which, on this day, is the right of servants 
as well as their masters, and of the working 
classes as well as their employers. 

7. That this Conference receives the Report drawn 
up by the Committee on the subject of So- 
cialism, and submits it to the consideration of 
the Churches of the Anglican Communion. 

8. That this Conference receives the Report drawn 
up by the Committee on the subject of Emi- 
gration, and commends the suggestions em- 
bodied in it to the consideration of the 
Churches of the Anglican Communion. 

9. (A) That this Conference receives the Report 


Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

drawn up by the Committee on the subject 
of the Mutual Relation of Dioceses and 
Branches of the Anglican Communion, and 
submits it to the consideration of the Church, 
as containing suggestions of much practical 

(B) That the Archbishop of Canterbury be re- 

quested to give his attention to the Appendix 
attached to the Report, with a view to action 
in the direction indicated, if, upon consider- 
ation, His Grace should think such action 

10. That, inasmuch as the Book of Common Prayer 

is not the possession of one Diocese or Pro- 
vince, but of all, and that a revision in one 
portion of the Anglican Communion must 
therefore be extensively felt, this Conference 
is of opinion that no particular portion of the 
Church should undertake revision without 
seriously considering the possible effect of 
such action on other branches of the Church. 

11. That, in the opinion of this Conference, the 

following Articles supply a basis on which 
approach may be by God’s blessing made 
towards Home Reunion :— 

(A) The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testa- 

ments, as “containing all things necessary to 
salvation,” and as being the rule and ultimate 
standard of faith. 

(B) The Apostles’ Creed, as the Baptismal Sym- 

bol ; and the Nicene Creed, as the sufficient 
statement of the Christian faith. 

(c) The two Sacraments ordained by Christ Him- 

self—Baptism and the Supper of the Lord— 

Resolutions of the Conference of 1888. 281 

ministered with unfailing use of Christ’s words 
of Institution, and of the elements ordained 
by Him. 

(D) The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in 
the methods of its administration to the vary- 
ing needs of the nations and peoples called of 
God into the Unity of His Church, 

12. That this Conference earnestly requests the con- 
stituted authorities of the various branches of 
our Communion, acting, so far as may be, in 
concert with one another, to make it known 
that they hold themselves in readiness to 
enter into brotherly conference (such as that 
which has already been proposed by the 
Church in the United States of America) 
with the representatives of other Christian 
Communions in the English-speaking races, 
in order to consider what steps can be taken, 
either towards corporate Reunion, or towards 
such relations as may prepare the way for 
fuller organic unity hereafter. 

13. That this Conference recommends as of great 
importance, in tending to bring about Re- 
union, the dissemination of information re- 
specting the standards of doctrine and the 
formularies in use in the Anglican Church ; 
and recommends that information be dissem- 
inated, on the other hand, respecting the 
authoritative standards of doctrine, worship, 
and government adopted by the other bodies 
of Christians into which the English-speaking 
races are divided. 

14. That,in the opinion of this Conference, earnest 
efforts should be made to establish more 
friendly relations between the Scandinavian 
and Anglican Churches ; and that approaches 



Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

on the part of the Swedish Church, with a 
view to the mutual explanation of differences, 
be most gladly welcomed, in order to the 
ultimate establishment, if. possible, of inter- 
communion on sound principles of ecclesias- 
tical polity. 7 

15. (A) That this Conference recognises with thank- ὦ 

fulness the dignified and independent position 
of the Old Catholic Church of Holland, and 
looks to more frequent brotherly intercourse 
to remove many of the barriers which at 
present separate us.! 

(B) That we regard it as a duty to promote 


friendly relations with the Old Catholic Com- 
munity in Germany, and with the “ Christian 
Catholic Church,” in Switzerland, not only out 

_of sympathy with them, but also in thankful- 

ness to God Who has strengthened them to 
suffer for the truth under great discourage- 
ments, difficulties, and temptations ; and that 

_we offer them the privileges recommended by 

the Committee under the conditions specified 
in its Report.! 

That the sacrifices made by the Old Catholics 
in Austria, deserve our sympathy, and that we 
hope, when their organisation is sufficiently 
tried and complete, a more formal relation 
may be found possible.! 

(Ὁ) That, with regard to the reformers in Italy, 

France, Spain, and Portugal, struggling to 
free themselves from the burden of unlawful 
terms of communion, we trust that they may 
be enabled to adopt such sound forms of 
doctrine and discipline, and to secure such 
Catholic organisation as will permit us to give 
them a fuller recognition 4 

Resolutions of the Conference of 1888. 283 

() That, without desiring to interfere with the 
tights: of Bishops of the Catholic Church to 
interpose in cases of extreme necessity, we 
deprecate any action that does not regard 
primitive and established principles of juris- 

᾿ diction and the interests of the whole Anglican 
Communion! | 

[} Resolutions (A) (B) (Ὁ) (D) (E) were carried nemine 
contradicente. | 

16. That, having regard to the fact that the question: 
of the relation of the Anglican Church to the 
Unitas Fratrum, or Moravians, was remitted 
by the last Lambeth Conference to a Com- 
mittee, which has hitherto presented no 
Report on the subject, the Archbishop of 

Canterbury be requested to appoint a Com- 
‘mittee of Bishops who shall be empowered to 
confer with learned theologians, and with the 
heads of the Unztas Fratrum, and shall report 
to His Grace before the end of the current 
year, and that His Grace be requested to take 
such action on their Report as he shall deem 

17. That this Conference, rejoicing in the friendly 
communications which have passed between | 
the Archbishops of Canterbury and other 
Anglican Bishops, and the Patriarchs of Con- 
stantinople and other Eastern Patriarchs and 
Bishops, desires to express its hope that the 
barriers to fuller communion may be, in 
course of time, removed by further intercourse 
and extended enlightment. The Conference 
commends this subject to the devout prayers 
of the faithful, and recommends that the 
counsels and efforts of our fellow-Christians 
should be directed to the encouragement of 
internal reformation in the Eastern Churches, 


284 Lambeth Conference of 1888. . 

rather than to the drawing away from them of 
individual members of their Communion. 

18, That the Archbishop of Canterbury be requested 
to take counsel with such persons as he may 
see fit to consult, with a view to ascertaining 
whether it is desirable to revise the English 
version of the Nicene Creed or of the 
Quicunque Vult.* 

[* Carried by 57, votes to 20.] 

19. That, as regards newly-constituted Churches, 
especially in non-Christian lands, it should be 
a condition of the recognition of them as in 
complete intercommunion with us, and es- 
pecially of their receiving from us Episcopal 
Succession, that we should first receive from 
them satisfactory evidence that they hold 
substantially the same doctrine as our own, 
and that their clergy subscribe Articles in 
accordance with the express statements of 
our own standards of doctrine and worship ; 
but that they should not necessarily be bound 
to accept in their entirety the thirty-nine 
Articles of Religion. 

Intemperance. 285 

No. XXXV. (See page 44.) 

N.B.— The following Reports must be taken as having 
the authority only of the Committees by whom 
they were respectively prepared and presented 
The Committees were not im every case 
unanimous in adopting the Reports. 

The Conference, as a whole, is responsible only 
Jor the formal Resolutions agreed to after 
discussion, and printed above, pages 277 to 284. 



IT is not necessary to say much of the sinfulness of 
intemperance in itself, or of the widespread mischief 
that is caused by it. If it cannot be considered the 
most sinful of all sins, it is difficult to deny that it is 
the most mischievous. And wherever large masses of 
the population find it difficult to obtain work at all, 
and large masses can only obtain it at wages too low 

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
Bishop of London (Chazrman). Bishop of Rochester. 

δ Colorado. 7 Saskatchewan. 
Ξ Kilmore. sg Sierra Leone. 
ia Newcastle. is Sodor and Man. 

a The Niger. τ Zululand. 
τ Pennsylvania. 

286 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

to sustain healthy life, the evils caused by intemperance 
press with heavier weight than ever they did before. 
The Church cannot be justified in witnessing this 
enormous amount of sin and misery without 
endeavouring to ascertain whether any special 
means can be discovered for effectually dealing with 
it,or whether it must be left to ordinary agencies 
used with more than ordinary zeal and persistency. 
The experience of the last fifty years is strongly in 
favour of the use of the special means which have 
hitherto achieved whatever success has been achieved 
in stemming the strong current of this widely- 
prevailing sin. It may be true that, if the whole 
Church had been thoroughly alive to the extent and 
nature of the mischief, much might have been done 
by more earnest efforts, both of Clergy and Laity, in 
the ordinary course of the Church’s work. But it is 
the perseverance and insistance of the Temperance 
Societies that has awakened the Church, and without 
these Societies we have no evidence to show that 
much or even anything would have been done to deal 
with the evil. The Temperance Societies have com- 
pelled the attention of the public at large, and have 
by so doing profoundly modified public opinion. 
There can be no doubt that drunkenness is now 
regarded with much more severe condemnation than 
before these Societies began their work,and the change 
is largely, if not entirely, due to them. The Tem- 
perance Societies have compelled the medical profes- 
sion to study the subject with more care than before, 
and the result of this study has greatly influenced 
both their utterances and their practice. The science 
of medicine is so complex and difficult, and the 
practice of medicine has been so largely influenced 
by tradition, that any particular question, such as that 
of the influence of alcohol on the body, has to wait 
its turn for examination unless some strong reason 
forces it forward. But the urgency of the Temperance 
Societies drew the attention of the profession, and 

οὖς Lntemperance,... 1287 

the result has justified that urgency. To the Tem- 
perance Societies is due the change in the practice 
of Insurance Offices, Fifty years ago it was their 
ordinary rule to require higher premiums from [1{6-᾿ 
insurers who totally abstained from intoxicating 
liquors. It is now proved that the total abstainers 
live longer than other men. And this has been con- 
firmed by the experience of the Benefit Societies 
among which those that make total abstinence a con- 
dition of membership are able to show a much smaller 
average of sickness than the others. And to all this 
is to be added the great and still-increasing effect of 
the Bands of Hope which though in some cases open 
te objection, are, nevertheless, every year adding 
largely to the number of pledged abstainers among 
adults, and bid fair before long entirely to change the 
public opinion of the classes that live by manual 
labour. , 

And it is natural that this should be so, for the sin, 
being one of the sins of the flesh, must be dealt with 
as indeed all such sins must be dealt with, mainly by 
flight from temptation. The special characteristic of 
all temptations of the flesh is the enormous difference 
in power between temptations close at hand and 
temptations at a distance. Ifaman is weak in this 
respect the one hope of his safety lies in keeping the 
temptation from him, and him from the temptation. 
There are no doubt many who have no need of this. 
But those who have fallen or are approaching a fall 
can, as a rule, be upheld in no other way. Now, 
this is precisely a work in which men can help each 
other, and in which that help can most effectually be 
given by an organisation formed for the purpose. 
Men can help each other by breaking through those 
customs of society which now surround men with 
incessant temptations in every transaction of life, by 
using their influence. to diminish the enormous 
number of public-houses which now make every street 
and road a peril to the weak, by diligently inves- 

288 Lambeth Conference of 1888, 

tigating the effects of alcoholic drinks on the body, 
and disproving the assertion that alcohol is necessary 
(except in rare and special cases) to health or to 
vigorous action. But even more can men help the 
weak by sympathy with them in their struggle, and 
by doing all they can to make the struggle easier. 
A weak man is told to abstain altogether ; and, easy 
as this is to many, to some it is exceedingly difficult, 
and the difficulty to these is greatly increased if they 
are to abstain quite alone, andthus, apparently, cut 
themselves off from the rest ; if their abstinence is, in 
itself, to be a kind of stigma, and to brand them 
with a public exposure of their weakness. Such men 
need to be shielded and supported by the stronger, 
or the battle which is often hard enough in any case 
becomes too much for their strength. 

Whatever may be said concerning what might 
have been done by other methods, it is undeniable 
that to organisations for the express purpose of 
dealing with intemperance, and to these organisations 
alone, must be attributed what has been done. And 
if any other method of doing the work is to claim 
precedence, it must first establish that claim by actual 
experience before it will be possible to take cog- 
nisance of it in determining the course that the 
authorities of the Church should recommend. The 
Temperance Societies are now doing the work, and 
there is at present no sign of any other mode of 
doing it being likely equally to succeed. 

And after what has been said above it clearly 
follows that the main weapon to be used in this 
warfare is the practice of total abstinence from in- 
toxicating liquors by those who desire to help their 
fellow-men. Nothing but this has the same hold of 
the weak or the tempted, give them the same en- 
couragement to fight their battle in the only true way, 
wins their affections maintains their perseverance.. 
Exhortations to total abstinence by those who do 
not themselves abstain are always comparatively 

Intemperance. 289 

feeble, sometimes irritating. The exhorter often fails 
to win even where perhaps he succeeds in convincing. 
The lesson that he teaches is that of moderation, 
which is an excellent lesson for the strong, but not 
the lesson which is needed by the weak. He may 
do something to prevent some from falling who now 
stand upright ; he can do little to save those who 
are on the edge, or to rescue those who have fallen 

The burden of the work must be borne by those 
who are willing to abstain entirely, But, on the 
other hand, it cannot be said that every one is bound 
to take up this particular burden as part of his service 
of Christ. Some are called to one form of devotion, 
some to another. There can be no question that 
every one who abstains, and makes it known that he 
abstains, for the sake of his weaker fellow-men, is 
giving them help, and in some cases more help than 
he knows, yet while men are all bound to help their 
fellows, they are not all bound to help them in the 
same manner or in the same degree or against the 
same enemies. All are bound to help the foreign 
mission work of the Church, but not all are bound 
to be missionaries. All are bound to help in spiritual 
work at home, but all are not called to the same 
spiritual work. All are bound to help the weak in 
their battle with intemperance, but not all to help 
them by total abstinence in their own persons. 

It seems reasonable, however, to say that those 
who are brought much into contact with intemperance 
should arm themselves with this weapon of total 
abstinence in their own persons, It would be well 
that wherever this battle with intemperance is of 
exceptional importance, or forms for the time the 
first duty imposed on the Clergy, total abstinence 
should be the weapon employed, This applies not 
only to England, but still more to many places in 
other parts of the world where native races have to 
be rescued from previous habits of intemperance, or 

290 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

to be upheld in their struggle to resist temptations of 
this kind. 

There is, however, much work to be done in this 
cause outside the direct battle with intemperance 
itself. And the Church cannot stand aloof from it. ' 

It seems to belong to the Church to use its utmost 
influence to press on all Governments the duty of 
diminishing the enormous amount of temptation which 
at present hinders the work of elevating and civilising 
the masses. There can be no doubt that wise legis- 
lation might do a great deal in this direction. ‘The 
diminution in the number of Public Houses, the 
shortening of the hours of sale, Sunday Closing, are 
instances of legislative measures that would probably 
‘be very beneficial. And a combination between 
Governments might wipe out the grievous stain 
which now rests on the countries that are counted 
foremost in the world—the stain of degrading and 
destroying the weaker races. It has pleased God to 
make the Christian nations stronger than any other 
—stronger than all others combined. But this 
strength brings with it a very solemn responsibility. 
And this solemn responsibility the Church ought 
incessantly to press on those who bear authority. 
It is grievous that it should be possible to say, with 
any most distant resemblance of truth, that it would 
be better for native races that Christian nations 
should never come into contact with them at all. 

In conclusion, it is of importance to lay much 
stress on the essential condition of permanent 
success in this work, namely, that it should be taken 
up in a religious spirit as part of Christian devotion 
to the Lord. The work must be done in His Name 
for the sake of His children whom He has bought 
with His Blood. A brief success may be obtained 
by forgetting the religious character of the task, and 
thinking only of the misery which intemperance 
causes and of the degradation inherent in it. But 
the religious spirit alone will maintain the conflict 

Intemperance. 291 

steadily through the obstinate resistance that will 
have to be encountered, and in spite of the many 
disappointments and failures that will have to be 

It is, again, the religious spirit which can alone 
repress the fanaticism which sometimes makes the 
total abstainer talk of his abstinence as the one thing 
needful ; which sometimes makes him uncharitable 
and presumptuous; which sometimes makes him 
think lightly of grievous sin, provided it be not the 
one sin which he condemns. pee 

But taken up in a religious spirit this work has 
a double blessing. It is not only blessed in the 
victory over sin and evil, but blessed also, and 
perhaps still more, in the door which it opens for the 
whole Gospel to enter men’s souls. ‘The conscience 
of the mass of the people speaks more clearly on 
this point than, perhaps, on any other. The Minister 
of the Gospel who begins with this finds that a very 
large number are at once ready to accept his teaching, 
because he carries their consciences with him from 
the first. They have already learnt that intemperance 
is wrong, and they are ready to believe in the value 
οὗ a Ministry which visibly and systematically wages 
war on it. And having learnt to trust and follow 
the Minister in this, they are far more ready to trust 
and follow him in allelse. To be all things to all 
men, in order that he might save some, was St. 
Paul’s rule. And as things now are in many parishes, 
and in many parts of the world, the same rule will 
be best kept by those Ministers of the Church who 
make ἃ point of showing themselves thoroughly 
in earnest in this great battle. | 

Signed on behalf of the Committee, ¢ 
ἡ F. LONDIN : 


292 Lambeth Conference of 1888, 

No, 2.—PURITY. 


IN submitting the following Report your Committee 
would observe that they have cast it in such a form 
that, if accepted, it may go forth as the utterance of 
the united Conference. 

We speak as those who are deeply conscious of 
their responsibility before God for the words which 
they utter upon a subject of tremendous moment. 

Knowing, as we do know, how sins of impurity are 
not only a grave public scandal, but are also festering 
beneath the surface, and eating into the life of multi- 
tudes in all classes and in all lands, we cannot keep 
silence, although we dare not utter all that we know. 

We are constrained, as Bishops of the Church of 
God, to lift up the standard of a high and pure 
morality, and we call upon all, whether of our own 
Communion or not, in the name of God our common 
Father, to rally round the standard. Especially do 
we press upon those on whom lies the responsibility 
of the cure of souls, to face the question, and to ask 

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
Bishop of Durham (Chazrman). Bishop of North Dakota. 

Ξ Brechin. τὶ Shrewsbury. 
BS Calcutta. οἴ Toronto. 

a Carlisle. i. Truro. 

ἣν Marlborough. Ἢ Wakefield. 

‘is Massachusetts, 

Purity. 293 

themselves what they are doing, or can do, to protect 
their flocks from the deadly ravages of sensual sin. 

We believe that, although the public conscience is 
in some degree awakened, and the self-sacrificing 
efforts of those who have laboured to this end have 
not been wholly in vain, yet the awful magnitude of 
the evil is but imperfectly realised. 

We are not blind to the danger of dealing publicly 
with the subject of impurity. We dread the effect, 
especially upon the young, of any increased familiarity 
with the details of sin. Notwithstanding we hold 
that the time has come when the Church must speak 
with no uncertain voice, 

We solemnly declare that a life of purity is alone 
worthy of a being created in the image of God. 

We declare that for Christians the obligation to 
purity rests upon the sanctity of the body, which is 
the “ Temple of the Holy Ghost.” 

We declare that a life of chastity for the unmarried 
is not only possible, but is commanded by God. 

We declare that there is no difference between man 
and woman in the sinfulness of sins of unchastity. 

We declare that on the man, in his God-given 
strength of manhood, rests the main responsibility, 

We declare that no one known to be living an 
immoral life ought to be received in Christian society. 

We solemnly protest against all lowering of the 
sanctity of marriage. 

We would remind all whom our voice may reach 
that the wrath of God, alike in Holy Scripture and in 
the history of the world, has been revealed against the 
nations which has transgressed the law of purity ; 
and we solemnly record our conviction that, wherever 
marriage is dishonoured and sins of the flesh are 
lightly regarded, the home-life will be destroyed, and 
the nation itself will, sooner or later, decay and 

We, on our part, as Bishops of the Church of God, 
satisfied as to the gravity of this matter, and feeling 

204 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

that nothing short of general action on the part of all 
Christian people will avail to arrest the evil, determine 
to confer with the Clergy and faithful Laity of our 
several Dioceses as to the wisest steps to be taken 
for the accomplishment of the weighty enterprise to 
which God is calling us. 

We believe that we may profitably deliberate upon 
such questions as the following :— | 

ΓΙ, How best to bring about a general reformation 
of manners, and to enforce a higher moral tone in the 
matter of purity. 

2. How especially to cuard the sanctity of marriage 
and to create a healthier public opinion upon the 
subject, and, to this end, how best to make the cele- 
bration of Holy Matrimony as reverent and impres- 
sive as possible. 

3. How most wisely to deal with this difficult and 
delicate question as regards our children, our homes, 
our schools, and other places of education. 

4. How best to strengthen the hands of those who 
are striving in the Army, the Navy, and other public 
services, to create and maintain a high standard of 

5. How best to provide safeguards for those who, 
from inability to marry, or from other circumstances 
of their lives, are exposed to special temptation. 

6. How best to bind together, and to encourage by 
the sense of union, all who desire to help, or to be 
helped, in the battle against impurity. 

_7..How best to purify art and literatire, and to 
repress all that is immodest in language, manners, 
and dress. 

8. How best to enforce or amend the laws framed 
to guard the innocent, to punish the guilty, to rescue 
the fallen, to suppress the haunts of vice, and to 
remove temptation from our thoroughfares. 

We thank God for the readiness, and even enthu- 
Siasm, with which the movement in favour of purity 
has been welcomed by. ogee men of every class. 

Purity.. 295 

There is a generosity and chivalry among the young 
which is seldom appealed to in vain; while large 
numbers are deeply thankful for every aid in the 
desperate battle against the sins of the flesh. 

Once more, 85. witnesses for God, we would speak 
to all whom our voice may reach. “Be strong in 
the Lord, and in the power of His might.” Live 
pure lives. Speak-pure words. . Think pure thoughts. 
Shun and abhor all that is not of perfect modesty. 
Guard with all jealousy the weak and the young. 
Above all pray for the sanctifying grace of the Holy 
Spirit of God, “that your whole spirit and soul and 
body may be preserved blameless unto the coming of 
our Lord Jesus Christ.” 

Signed on behalf of the Committee, 


206 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

No, 3—DIVORCE., 


THE Committee appointed to consider the subject of 
“ Divorce, and the question whether it may be prac- 
ticable to offer any advice or suggestion which may 
help the Bishops and Clergy towards agreement in 
their action concerning it,’ reports as follows :— 

They think it necessary to call attention to the 
fact that in very many Christian nations there is 
evidently a growing laxity of principle and of practice 
with regard to Divorce, and that in some countries 
strong attempts have been made to afford further 
facilities for it, with the result of weakening and 
lowering, both in law and in popular sentiment, the 
idea of the sanctity of marriage. 

1. They therefore consider it important to declare 
that, inasmuch as our Lord’s words expressly forbid 
Divorce, except in the case of fornication or adultery, 
the Christian Church cannot recognise Divorce in 
any other than the excepted case, or give any sanc- 
tion to the marriage of any person who has been 
divorced contrary to this law, during the life of the 
other party. 

2. They would add that under no circumstances 
ought the guilty party, in a case of Divorce for forni- 

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
Bishop of Chester (Chazrman). Bishop of Huron. 

Ἢ Bombay. » Maryland. 
Ms Dover. », Mississippi. 
; Durham. » Quincy. 

ἦν Exeter. »» slngapore. 

Divorce. 297 

cation or adultery, to be regarded, during the lifetime 
of the innocent party, as a fit recipient of the blessing 
of the Church on marriage. 

3. They recognise the fact that there always has. 
been a difference of opinion in the Church on the 
question whether our Lord meant to forbid marriage 
to the innocent party in a Divorce for adultery: and 
they recommend that the Clergy should not be 
instructed to refuse the Sacraments or other privileges. 
of the Church to those who, under civil sanction, are 
thus married. 

4. But whereas doubt has been entertained whether 
our Lord meant to permit such marriage to the 
innocent party, the Committee are unwilling to 
suggest any precise instructions in this matter, and 
recommend that, where the laws of the land will 
permit, the determination should be left to the judg- 
ment of the Bishop of the Diocese, whether the 
Clergy would be justified in refraining from pro-. 
nouncing the blessing of the Church on such unions. 

Signed on behalf of the Committee, 



298 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 



YOUR Committee have approached the consideration | 
of the subject submitted to them with an over- 
whelming sense of their responsibilities; inasmuch 
as the question intimately affects the sanctity of 
marriage, and therefore lies at the root of social 

After considering various representations rahe 
have been laid before them from divers quarters, they 
beg leave to report as follows :— 

I. Your Committee desire to affirm distinctly that 
Polygamy is inconsistent with the law of Christ 
respecting marriage. 

2. They cannot find that either the law of Christ 
or the usage of the early Church would permit the 
baptism of any man living in the practice of poly- 
gamy, even though the polygamous alliances should 
have been contracted before his conversion. 

3. They are well aware that the change from 
polygamy to monogamy must frequently involve 

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
Bishop of Durham (Chaiyman). Bishop of the Niger. 

‘s Central Africa. Bishop Perry. 

mv Chester. Bishop of Sierra Leone. 
Ὦ Exeter. ἐξ South Dakota. 
me Guiana. Ἢ Travancore. 

a London. τ Waiapu. 

Ἰᾶ Meath. m Zululand. 

is Missouri. 

Polygamy. 299 

great difficulty and even hardship, but they are of 
opinion that it is not possible to lay down a precise 
rule to be observed under all circumstances in dealing 
with this difficulty. 

They consequently think that the question of time 
and manner, which must depend largely on local 
circumstances, can only be determined by local 

4. Your Committee recommend that persons living 
in polygamy should, on their conversion, be accepted 
as candidates for Baptism, and kept under Christian 
instruction until such time as they shall be in a 
position to accept the law of Christ. 

They consider it far better that Baptism should be 
withheld from such persons, while nevertheless they 
receive instruction in the truths of the Gospel, than 
that a measure should be sanctioned which would 
tend to lower the conception of the Christian law of 
marriage, and thus inflict an irreparable wound on 
the morality of the Christian Church in its most vital 

5. The wives of polygamists may, in the opinion of 
the Committee, be admitted, in some cases, to 
Baptism ; inasmuch as their position is materially 
different from that of the polygamist husband. In 
most countries where polygamy prevails they have 
no personal freedom to contract or dissolve a matri- 
monial alliance; and moreover they presumably do 
not violate the Christian precept which enjoins 
fidelity to one husband. 

6. In carrying into effect the principles here laid 
down, with due regard to the dictates of love and 
justice, serious burdens will in some cases be imposed 
on the Churches, but no trouble, or cost, or self- 
sacrifice, ought to be spared to make any suffering 
which may be caused as light and easy to bear as 

7. Difficult questions of detail which may arise in 
following these recommendations must be left to the . 

U 2 

300 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

‘decision of the local authorities of the Church, 
whether Diocesan or Provincial. 

8. Throughout this Report polygamy has been 
taken to mean the union of one man with several 
wives; but among some tribes the union of one 
woman with several husbands is a recognised institu- 
tion. It will be plain that no such union can be 
recognised by the Church. 

g. It has been represented to your Committee that 
heathen marriages in many cases do not imply a 
mutual pledge of life-long fidelity ; and instruction 
has been asked as to the mode of dealing with such 
cases on the conversion of the contracting parties, so 
as to impart a Christian character to the contract. 
The Committee think it best to leave the local 
authorities of the Church to determine in what way 
this end may be best attained; but they deprecate 
any course which would tend to impair the validity 
(within their own sphere) of contracts undertaken 
prior to conversion, so far as these contracts are not 
inconsistent with the law of Christ. 

10. In laying down the principles which should 
rule the admission of Christian converts for the 
future, the Committee have no intention of passing 
any censure on those who have decided otherwise in 
the past; and they desire to leave to individual 
Bishops the responsibility of dealing with difficulties 
which may arise in any part of the mission-field from 
the adoption of a different line of action heretofore 
by those in authority. 


Sunday Observance. 301 



YOUR Committee have met and prayerfully considered 
the subject of the sanctity and observance of the 
Lord’s Day, and have agreed to the following state- 
ments of their deliberate judgment on this momen- 
tous question, which they submit as their report :— 

1. That the principle of the religious observance 
of one day in seven is of Divine and primeval 
obligation, and was afterwards embodied in 
the Fourth Commandment. 

2. That from the time of our Lord’s Resurrection 
the first day of the week was observed as a 
day of sacred joy by Christians, and was 
ere long adopted by the Church as the 
Christian Sabbath or “the Lord’s Day.” 

3. That the observance of the Lord’s Day as a 
day of rest, of worship, and of religious » 
teaching, has been a priceless blessing in all 
Christian lands in which it has been 

4. That the growing licence in its observance 
threatens a grave change in its sacred and 
beneficent character. 

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 

Bishop of Exeter (Chatrman). Bishop of Indiana. 
τ Argyll. Ἢ Liverpool. 
τὴ Brisbane i Wakefield. 
Ἢ Cashel. ‘ Washington, 

"302 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

5. That especially the increasing practice on the 
part of some of the wealthy and leisurely 
classes of making the day a day of secular 
amusement is most strongly to be depre- 

6. That the most careful regard should be had to 
the danger of any encroachment upon the 
rest which on this day is the right of 
servants as well as their masters, and of the 
working classes as well as their employers. 

Signed on behalf of the Committee, 

E. H. EXON. 


Soczalisme. 303 



THIS Committee was directed to report “on the 
Church’s practical work in relation to Socialism.” 
It will be desirable therefore, in the first place, to 
ascertain, if possible, what is the meaning of 
Socialism. This, however, is not easy, as the word is 
used at present in very different senses. When 
Proudhon was asked, What is Socialism? he replied, 
“Tt is every aspiration towards the improvement of 
society.” Laveleye remarks upon this answer, that 
“ Proudhon’s definition is too wide,—it omits two 
characteristics. In the first place, every socialistic 
doctrine aims at introducing greater equality into social 
conditions ; and, secondly, it tries to realise those 
reforms by the action of the law or the State.” So 
far, however, as this definition makes the interference 
᾿ of the State a necessary element of Socialism, it is not 
universally accepted. Schaffle, for instance, says :—. 
“The alpha and omega of Socialism is the transform- 
ation of private competing capitals into a united collec- 
tive capital ;” and T. Kirkup, ina thoughtful article on 
Socialism in the last edition of the Encyclopedia 

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 

Bishop of Manchester Bishop of Mississippi. 
(Chairman). > Pittsburgh. 
ὰ Brisbane. ‘is Rochester. 
a Carlisle. δ Sydney. 
pe Derry. ᾿ Waketield. 

Φ Michigan. 

304 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

Britannica, affirms that “the centralaim of Socialism 
is to terminate the divorce of the workers from the 
natural sources of subsistence and of culture”; and, 
again, he says, “the essence of the theory consists in 
this—associated production, with a collective capital, 
with the view to an equitable distribution.” Speaking 
broadly, then, and with reference to such definitions 
as the preceding, any scheme of social reconstruction 
may be called Socialism which aims at uniting labour 
and the instruments of labour (land and capital), 
whether by means of the State, or of the help of the 
rich, or of the voluntary co-operation of the poor. 

Between Socialism, as thus defined, and Chris- 
tianity, there is obviously no necessary contradiction. 
Christianity sets forth no theory of the distribution 
of the instruments or the products of labour ; and if, 
therefore, some Socialists are found to be in opposition 
to the Christian religion, this must be due to the 
accidents and not to the essence of their social creed. 
Some Socialists are atheists, others advocate loose 
doctrines as to family ties; others, like the Anarchists, 
seek to realise their aims, so far as they have any, by 
undisguised murder and robbery; while, according to 
some, the very possession of private property is a 
usurpation and a wrong to the community. With 
such men the Christian Church can form no alliance. 
And yet at the same time with what they profess to 
be their central aim, the improvement of the material 
and moral condition of the poor, she must have the 
deepest sympathy. Their methods, indeed, are not 
hers. Spoliation or injustice in any form is abhorrent 
alike to her sentiment and belief. She has no faith 
in the inherent power of humanity to redeem itself 
from selfishness. She seeks to make men prosperous 
and wise and good, not by the force of laws or 
bayonets, but by the change of individual hearts, and 
the introduction of a new brotherhood in Christ. 

Not the less, however, is she bound, following the 
teaching of her Master, to aid every wise endeavour 

Socialism. 305 

which has for its object the material and moral 
welfare of the poor. Her Master taught her that all 
men are brethren, not because they share the same 
blood, but because they have a common Heavenly 
Father. He further taught her that if any of the 
members of this spiritual family were greater, richer, 
or better than the rest, they were bound to use their 
special means or ability in the service of the whole. 
“ He that is greatest among you,” He said, “ shall be 
your servant,’—and that for a special reason, because 
each disciple was bound to imitate his Divine Master, 
“Who came not to be. ministered unto, but to 
minister, and to give His life a ransom for many.” 

The Church’s practical duty,then, towards Socialism 
must be determined by the answer to this question, 
will the union of labour and the instruments of labour 
tend to improve the material, mental, and moral con- 
dition of mankind? Experience seems to show that 
it will. 

It may still, however, be a question, what is the 
wisest method of bringing about this union between 
labour and its instruments? Two principal schemes 
have been proposed :— 

(1) That labourers shall be encouraged in habits 
of thrift, in order that with the property thus acquired 
they may purchase land, or shares in societies for 
co-operative production. 

(2) That the State shall take possession of the 
whole land and capital of any country, with or 
without compensation to their former owners ; that 
the property thus nationalised, shall be heldin trust 
for the community by the State, the Commune, or 
associations of working men; that then the State, the 
Commune, or the association as the case may be, 
shall take measures for the preservation, increase, and 
employment of the common capital, requiring work 
from each man according to his ability, and bestowing 
property upon each man according to his needs, or 
the value of his labour. Minor modifications of this 

306 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

scheme, tending to bring it into closer harmony with 
the existing state of society, have been proposed by 
some Socialistic teachers, but still it may be taken as 
a substantially correct representation of the ultimate 
aim of very many. 

To this second method of uniting labour and its 
instruments the Committee would urge the following 
objections :—(1) If full compensation were given to 
the present holders of property the scheme could 
hardly be realised, while if full compensation were 
withheld it would become one of undisguised spolia- 
tion. (2) If Government were able to acquire just 
possession of the’ whole property of a community, it 
is difficult to see how the affairs of any great com- 
mercial undertaking could be conducted by the State 
or the Commune with the energy, economy, and 
sagacious foresight which are necessary to secure 
success. (3) If all men had to work under State or 
Communal inspection and compulsion, it would be 
difficult for them to retain freedom, the sense of 
parental responsibility, and those numerous traits of 
individuality which give richness to the human 

The Committee strongly recommend the adoption 
of the first-named method. They believe that it will 
be well to encourage working men to become posses- 
sors of small farms, and of shares in societies for 
co-operative production in trade and agriculture. 
They are not unaware that these societies have 
frequently failed, but they believe that the opinion is. 
not without its weight, that if due care be taken to 
secure efficient and trustworthy managers, to pay 
them an adequate salary, and to treat them with a 
generous confidence, there is no reason why such 
undertakings should not become successful, as indeed. 
they commonly are now, when their management is 
in competent hands. 

Two objections have been frequently advanced 
against this method of diminishing the present dis- 

Socialism. 307 

tress; Ist, that it is unjust to let any one but the 
labourer obtain possession of any part of the products 
of his labour ; and, 2ndly, that no man of property or 
ability ought to seek personal profit from the employ- 
ment of his special advantages, or ought even to be 
allowed to become the permanent owner of either 
land or capital. 

The first objection is not tenable. The Committee 
hold that it is just (1) to pay high wages for excep- 
tional ability ; (2) to compensate for his abstinence 
the man who refrains from consuming his own share 
of the products of labour, and by so doing makes it 
possible to maintain and increase the capital of the 
community ; (3) to allow any one to convert his 
savings into the form of capital or estate. 

The second objection is really founded upon the 
general spirit of our Lord’s teaching—viz., that great- 
ness, ability, or wealth should be made the means of 
service to the poor and weak without special fee or 
reward. The Committee fully admit that this is the 
ideal set before us by our Divine Master, and that it is 
the end, towards which we should press, as quickly as 
the conquest of selfishness will allow us. But they hold 
that there is no surer cause of failure in practical 
affairs, than the effort to act on an ideal which has 
not yet been realised. If the Church is to act safely 
as well as sublimely, she must take the self-regarding 
motives with her on the long path by which she 
advances towards the perfect life of love. She must 
not assume the existence of what does not yet exist. 
She must not, like the Anarchists, destroy the whole 
existing framework of society for the sake of making 
experiments. Nay, more, she must not ignore the 
fact that self-regard is the necessary condition of self- 
preservation, and that her Master’s law of moral con- 
duct, that each shall love his neighbour as himself, 
implies a certain amount of self-regard. Competition 
is not injurious in itself, it only becomes so when it 
is unrestricted, when it takes no counsel of the 
dictates of brotherly love. 

308 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

The Committee do not doubt that Government can 
do much to protect the class, known as proletarians 
from the evil effects of unchecked competition. The 
English poor-law has long ago provided the bare ne- 
cessaries of life for those who cannot otherwise obtain 
them; the institution of State Savings Banks has pro- 
vided for the poor man a safe investment and moderate 
return for his savings. Acts of Parliament have re- 
quired the builders and ownersof houses to have regard 
for the health and comfort of their tenants, while the 
factory legislation of this country has effectually pro- 
tected those labourers who cannot protect themselves. 
The Committee believe, further, that the State may 
justly and safely extend this protective action in 
several directions. It may legalise the formation of 
Boards of Arbitration, to avert the disastrous effects 
of strikes. It may assist in the formation and main- 
tenance of technical schools. It may see that powers, 
already existing, under Sanitary Acts, are more 
effectually exercised. It may facilitate the acquisition 
by Municipalities of town lands. The State may even 
encourage a wider distribution of property by the 
abolition of entail, where it exists; and it may be 
questioned whether the system of taxation might not 
be varied in a sense more favourable to the claims of 
labourers than that which now exists. 

But, after all, the best help is self-help. More even 
than increase of income, and security of deposit, 
thrift and self-restraint are the necessary elements 
of material prosperity. And in encouraging and 
strengthening such habits and feelings the Church’s 
help is invaluable. By requiring some knowledge of 
economic science from her candidates for orders ; by 
forming and fostering institutions for the provision 
of practical education and rational recreation; by 
establishing penny banks and workmen’s guilds; 
above all, by inducing capitalists to admit their work- 
~men to profit-sharing, and by teaching artisans how 
to make co-operative production successful she may 

Socialism. 309 

do much to diminish discontent, and to increase the 
feeling of brotherly interest between class and class. 
The Clergy may enter into friendly relations with 
Socialists, attending, when possible, their club meet- 
ings, and trying to understand their aims and 
methods. At the same time it will contribute no 
little to draw together the various classes of society 
if the Clergy endeavour, in sermons and lectures, to 
to set forth the true principles of Society, showing 
how property is a trust to be administered for the 
good of humanity, and how much of what is good 
and true in Socialism is to be found in the precepts 
of Christ. The call to aid the weak, through works 
of what is ordinarily known as charity, has been, at 
all times, faithfully pressed by the Church of Christ, 
and has been met by a noble response, which has been 
the chief strength of works of beneficence in modern 
Society. But the matter is one, not merely of Charity, 
but of Social and Christian Duty. It is in this light 
that the Church has to proclaim it in these critical 
times, with some special boldness and earnestness. At 
the same time the word of warning should not be 
wanting. Mutual suspicion and the imputation of 
selfish and unworthy motives keep apart those who 
have, in fact, a common aim. Intestine strife and 
doctrines of spoliation destroy confidence, arrest 
trade, and will but increase misery. 

The Committee believe that, in the present condi- 
tion of thought and knowledge, they cannot wisely or 
profitably go further than they have done above in 
the way of detailed suggestion. There is less temp- 
tation to over-haste in forcing on social experiments, 
inasmuch as the history of the past shows convin- 
cingly that the principles of the Gospel contain germs 
from which Social renovation is surely, if slowly, 
developed by the continuous action of Christian 
thought and feeling upon every form of evil and 
suffering. If all will only labour, under the impulse 
of Christian love, for the highest benefit of each, we 

310 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

shall advance by the shortest possible path to that 
better and happier future for which our Master 
taught us to hope and pray. 

Signed on behalf of the Committee, 



Care of Emigrants. 311 



IN considering the question of the practical work of 
the Church in relation to the Care of Emigrants, your 
Committee have limited their inquiries and the 
recommendations which they desire to submit to the 
judgment of the Conference, to those points which 
bear on the promotion of the religious and moral 
well-being of our emigrants. They are of opinion 
that the wider subject of encouraging and assisting 
emigration is outside the scope of their deliberations, 
and, even were this not the case, that it is far too 
large a question to be adequately dealt with in the 
time at their disposal. 

I. In the first place, your Committee feel that they 
cannot too strongly emphasise the vast zmportance of 
the subject entrusted to them for consideration. They 
believe that the problem is one of the most urgent 
and pressing of the many problems with which the 
Church has to deal at the present day. And they 
cannot but think that before many years have passed 
away, the difficulties of dealing with the problem will 

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
Bishop of Llandaff(Chazryman). Bishop of North Dakota. 

a Algoma 9 North Queensland. 
a“ Liverpool. δ Pittsburgh. 

τ Maritzburg. τι Quebec. 

τ Newark. δὲ Rupertsland. 

δ Niagara. Sodor and Man. 

312 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

be immeasurably increased ; and thus it becomes of 
paramount necessity that the machinery for coping 
with these difficulties should be organised and set in 
motion while the extent of emigration is such as to 
render this possible. 

When once the machinery is in good working 
order, it will then be capable of almost indefinite 
extension, to meet the increasing demands upon its 

(2) Foremost among the reasons which point to 
the importance of due provision being made for the 
spiritual care of our emigrants is this :—Those who 
leave the British Isles and go forth to seek their 
fortune in new lands, choose, for the most part, either 
the United States of America, or Canada, or some of 
the Colonies of Australia. Of these a very large 
number are children of one or another Branch of the 
Anglican Communion, and, as such, have a right to 
expect that the Anglican Church will duly minister 
to them in whatever part of the world their lot may 
be cast. An enormous responsibility lies upon the 
Church in this matter, and it is her duty, so far as in 
her lies, to prevent estrangement, or any loss of 
spiritual life in her children, through the accident of 
their removal from one Branch of the Anglican 
Church to another. 

(6) The simple consideration of the very large 
number of emigrants who have left and who are still 
leaving british Ports, is a sufficient indication of the 
immense responsibility of the Church towards them. 
Since the year of the Battle of Waterloo (1815) the 
total number of emigrants leaving the United 
Kingdom has been 11,740,573. But a truer estimate 
of the great increase in later years is shown from the 
fact that, during the last ten years, since the Lambeth 
‘Conference of 1878, 3,519,660 out of the above- 
named 11 millions have left this country. This gives 
an average of 319,566 emigrants per annum (includ- 
ing British subjects and lorsigtae The average is, 

Care of Emigrants. 313 

however, now greatly exceeded every year, as the 
following figures will show :— 
Total number of Emigrants, inclu- 

British and Irish Emigrants who ding British subjectsand Foreigners, 
have left British Ports in the last who have left British Ports in the 

IO years. last 10 years. 
In 1878 ... 112,902 In 1878 ... 147,663 
» 1879 ... 164,274 4 AOUO. sae ΙΖ ΤῸΝ 
» δ, css) Sar, ban " EOOO ... 442,208 
» 1881 ... 243,002 - OL ace: Gee he 
» 1882 ... 279,366 » 1882 ... 413,288 
» 1883 ... 320,118 , 1883 ... 397,157 
ον 854 Ὁ, 1242876 » 1884 ... 303,901 
» 1885 ... 207,644 » 1885 ... 264,385 
» 1886 ... 232,900 » 1886 ... 330,801 
» 1887 ... 281,487 » 1887 ... 396,494 
Total ... 2,311,414 Total ... 3,195,660 
Average per Annum 

of British and 
Irish Emigrants. 
By far the largest proportion of emigrants go to 
the United States. The percentage, in 1887, to the 
three chief fields of emigration, was as follows :—To 
the United States, 72 per cent.; to British North 
America, 11 per cent. ; to the Australasian Colonies, 
12 per cent.; to all other places, 5 per cent. The 
following table shows the distribution of the actual 
number of emigrants in 1887 :— 

Average per Annum 
3 ΟΣ | of all Emigrants 319,566 

Emigrants (British and Irish 

only) 1887 

To the United 
States ... 201,526 

» British North 
America... 32,025 
» Australasia 34,183 

» all other places 13,753 


Total Emigrants (British and 
Foreign) 1887. 

To the United 

States 296,901 
» British North 

America... 44,406 
» Australasia 35,198 

» all other places 19,989 


ν καὶ a SS 

214 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

Thus, very nearly three-fourths of the 396,494 people 
who left the United Kingdom last year were of British 
or Irish origin, whose spiritual interests the Church 
cannot properly disregard. 

(c) A third reason for urging the importance of the 
care of our emigrants is the danger to which they are 
exposed between the time of their leaving their old 
home and the time when they are finally established 
in their new one. 

The dangers on the voyage are by no means in- 
considerable. The impossibility, when 500 or more 
emigrants are carried in one vessel, of separating the 
reckless and careless from those who are thoughtful 
and well-disposed, exposes the latter to great tempta- 
tions. This is especially the case with young 
unmarried women. Then, again, the dangers are no 
less great at the port of arrival, where young persons, 
among strangers and surroundings which are new 
and unknown, are liable to fall a prey to the 
unscrupulous men and women who are ever on the 
watch, at such times, to take advantage of ignorance 
and innocence. And, perhaps, the greatest danger 
of all arises from the temptations to intemperance 
and other vices to which the emigrants are exposed 
on arrival at their new settlement. 

(4) One more point remains to be mentioned under 
this head, and that is, the enormous value of the 
opportunity afforded by the softening influence which 
is brought about by the severance of the associations 
of home and early life, for awakening religious im- 
pressions in those who have hitherto been insensible 
to the Church’s teaching, as well as for deepening 
the spiritual life of those who are true Christians. 
Wherever this opportunity is taken advantage of, the 
result is seen in the strengthening of the Church in 
the country to which the emigrant goes. 

Having thus dwelt upon some of the chief reasons 
why the spiritual care of emigrants is of such 


Care of Emigrants. 315 

supreme importance, your Committee proceed to 
What work has already been done in this direction. 
What work still remains to be done. 

II. Work which has already been done. 

Your Committee have pleasure in acknowledging 
what has already been accomplished in the establish- 
ment and continuance of moral and religious work 
among emigrants. The Society for Promoting 
Christian Knowledge has organised a plan which is 
working with much success, and which, when further 
developed, promises to be of the highest value to the 
Church. Your Committee desire to express their 
hearty sense of gratitude which is due for the 
admirable work carried on by that Society, which 
has always been at the head of all religious efforts on 
behalf of emigrants. They would also acknowledge 
with thankfulness the meritorious work which has 
been done by other Societies, especially at the Port 
of London, and notably that which has been under- 
taken by the St. Andrew’s Waterside Mission. 

Without being able to give a complete account of 
every attempt made to assist and benefit emigrants, it 
is gratifying to be able to point to the following 
efforts, which have been successfully carried out, and 
which have led to valuable results :— 

(2) Chaplains have been appointed at all the ports 
of departure in the United Kingdom, -whose duty it 
is to minister to emigrants; to arrange services for 
them, both before starting and on the voyage; to 
give them introductions to Clergymen abroad ; and 
generally to arrange for their reception by the 
Church in the new country to which they are 

(ὁ) The Church in the United States of America 
has initiated a most important work, in having 
appointed Chaplains at New York, Baltimore, and 
Philadelphia, whose duty it is to give such spiritual 


“3316 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

aid as is possible to arriving immigrants, and to 
commend them further to the Church at their ultimate 
destination inland. 

(c) Chaplains who accompany emigrants on the 
voyage, and who minister to them, and hold frequent 
services on board, have also been appointed on many 
vessels going to America, Australia, and New 
Zealand, and the Cape. The great value of having 
such Chaplains on board is evident, and this is 
especially the case on the long-voyage ships to 
Australia and the Cape. The financial burden of the 
remuneration of these Chaplains is borne by the 

(2) In order to provide due protection for girls and 
single women emigrating, matrons (other than the 
regular Government Emigrant Matrons) have from 
time to time been appointed, who are required to 
look after their charges during the voyage and on 
arrival at their destination. The help derived from 
their protection and the moral influence of the matrons 
has been largely felt. In this branch of the work 
your Committee desire to acknowledge the valuable 
services rendered by the Girls’ Friendly Society. 

. (6) Clergymen living in all parts of the world have 
consented to allow persons emigrating to be specially 
commended to them by letter, and they have given 
valuable assistance and advice to emigrants when 
first settling in a new country. 

(f) The publication of some thousands of hand- 
books for the use of emigrants has in the past proved 
a valuable held to them. These books contain parti- 
culars about the various Colonies, and other matters 
likely to be of assistance. The recent establishment 
~ by the English Government of an “ Emigrants’ 
Information Office,” where books, leaflets, and in- 
formation may be had, is found to be of very great 

(9) A large number of books (Bibles, Prayer-books, 
and other books of a religious or interesting nature) 

Care of Emigrants. 317 

have been provided for the emigrants on their 
outward voyage. Many of these have been. given 
away, and in this manner religious teaching and 
influence have been brought to bear upon them. 

(Δ) Forms of Letters of Commendation for the use 
of emigrants have been issued in large numbers,} 
and it is most desirable that Clergymen should 
provide themselves with these letters. The Clergy- 
man of the parish in which the intending emigrant 
resides should fill up such forms, and address to a 
Bishop or Clergyman of the Church abroad, where 
the emigrant intends to settle. Where these letters 
have been given, they have been proved to be of real 
value, as forming a link between home and _ foreign 
countries, and securing for the emigrant a welcome 
from the Church. ) 

III. Work still remaining to be done. 

Your Committee consider that, notwithstanding 
the praiseworthy efforts made and carried out, for 
the moral and spiritual welfare of emigrants, a very 
large and increasing amount of work lies before the 
Church, which calls for immediate, earnest and 
united action on the part of every branch of the 
Anglican Communion. They consider that this 
work may be attempted in two ways: (i.) asa 
development and improvement of existing organisa- 
tions ; and (ii.) as a new departure. 

(A) Under the head of the development of organisa- 
tions which already exist, your Committee would 
mention the following suggestions which seem to be 
of importance :— 

(1) That the English Bishops should impress upon 
the Parochial Clergy, at Diocesan Conferences and 
on other occasions, the solemn duty (a) of providing 
that not one of their Parishioners be allowed to leave 
home without being provided with a Letter of Com- 

1 For a copy of this Form, see Schedule A. 

2418 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

mendation to the Church abroad, stating particularly 
whether they have been baptized and confirmed, 
or are communicants; (4) of informing intending 
emigrants that the Protestant Episcopal Church in 
the United States of America is the only Church in 
the United States which is in full communion with 
the Church of England. 

(2) That it is expedient that letters should be 
sent from England (in addition to the above Com- 
mendatory Letters), to precede the emigrant on his 
journey out. These letters should be sent to the 
Bishop abroad, and should give notice of the intended 
arrival of the emigrant, adding such information with 
regard to character and qualifications as may be of 
assistance to the Bishop or Clergyman to whom the 
emigrant is commended. 

(3) That the Bishops in the Colonies and in the 
United States of America be urged to press upon 
their Clergy the duty of prompt attention to such 
Commendatory Letters as may be presented to them 
from emigrants, either directly or through the Bishops. 

(4) That the attention of the Church in the United 
States be called to the extreme desirability and need 
of at once increasing the number of immigrant 
Chaplains at New York and other ports, where at 
present the number of emigrants makes it impossible 
for the existing staff to minister adequately to those 
who arrive. At New York especially it would seem 
that these increased Church ministrations should be 
supplied with as little delay as possible. 

(5) That, with the view of increasing the number 
of Chaplains who shall accompany emigrants on the 
voyage, the Clergy should be specially invited, when 
travelling to the Colonies, to take every opportunity 
of acting as Chaplains on board emigrant ships. 

1 Full information as to the duties of such Chaplains, and 
of the remuneration which can in some cases be offered them, 
is obtainable from the S.P.C.K. 

Care of Emigrants. 319. 

(6) That, in consideration of the great influence 
exercised upon emigrants by the Government Matron 
on board ship, it is important that care be taken in 
the selection of good Christian women for the office. 

(B) Your Committee feel that the work which has 
already been attempted for the spiritual welfare of 
our emigrants has been carried out by the best 
methods, and therefore their recommendations for 
the future have been mainly devoted to the develop- 
ment and extension of existing organisations. 

They would, however, suggest for consideration the 
following four poznts of new departure, as being, in their 
opinion, of paramountimportance atthe present time:— 

(1) That the Church in Australasia and in Canada 
- be urged to provide more adequate spiritual ministra- 
tions for immigrants at the ports of arrival, by the 
appointment of Chaplains whose whole time could, if 
necessary, be devoted to the work. 

(2) That it is most desirable to establish homes for 
emigrants at the ports of departure and arrival, where 
those needing protection or care may be received. 

(3) That the Archbishops of Canterbury and York 
and the Bishop of London be requested to prepare a 
Form of Prayer for Use at Sea, having regard to the 
special needs of emigrants. 

(4) That it would be of great service if more fre- 
quent and regular interchange of reports of work 
done, and of the requirements in respect of emigrants, 
could take place between the Church in England and 
the Church in the United States and in the Colonies. 

Your Committee cannot bring their report to a 
close without expressing their deep thankfulness to 
Almighty God for the measure of success which has 
hitherto attended the Church in her efforts on behalf 
of her emigrants, and an earnest prayer for the 
guidance and blessing of the Holy Spirit in the 
years to come. 

Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
R, LLANDAFF, Chairman, 

220 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 



rr eee eee eee eee ee eee eee eee eee eee eee eer ss 

Reverend and dear Sir, 
I desire herewith to commend to your pastoral 
care and brotherly »οσά OfftCOS........cccccccccccceeciceecsccsecssssssssesssssnees 

Sion The Pare OP i BOs Ie oth eg ES ΜΕ in the 

DEO OF cha ee ieee na who ἐς about to 


* Here state whether baptized, confirmed, or a Communicant. 


Mutual Relations. 321 



THE Committee feel that it would be impossible for 
them to deal in any complete and exhaustive manner 
with a subject so extensive as that which has been 
referred to them for consideration. They have there- 
fore determined to confine their attention to such 
definite and practical points as have been brought 
under their notice, and as appear to them to be 
worthy of being made the subject of report. 

I. The attention of the Committee has been 
directed to alleged neglect of certain important 
principles which were laid down by the Lambeth 
Conference of 1878. ‘The principles are contained in 
the following quotations :— 

(1) First, that the duly-certified action of every 
national or particular Church, and of each 
ecclesiastical Province (or Diocese not in- 
cluded in a Province), in the exercise of its 

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
Bishop of Carlisle (Chairman). Bishop of Derry. 

a Adelaide. εῇ Jamaica. 

fe Auckland. te Manchester. 

¥ Brechin. vf Moray and Ross. 
is Calcutta. Ἂ New Jersey. 

Ν᾽ Capetown. Ὡς North China. 

a Central Pennsylvania. a Sierra Leone. 

a Chester. Ἦ Tennessee. 


222 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

own discipline, should be respected by all 
the other Churches, and by their individual 

(2) Secondly, that when a Diocese, or territorial 
sphere of administration, has been con- 
stituted by the authority of any Church or 
Province of this Communion within its own 
limits, no Bishop or other Clergyman of 
any other Church should exercise his func- 
tions within that Diocese, without the 
consent of the Bishop thereof. 

(3) Thirdly, that no Bishop should authorise to 
officiate in his Diocese a Clergyman coming 
from another Church or Province unless 
such Clergyman present letters testimonial, 
countersigned by the Bishop of the Diocese 
from which he comes, such letters to be as 
nearly as possible in the form adopted by 
such Church or Province in the case of the 
transfer of a Clergyman from one Diocese 
to another. ) 

(See above, page 166-7.) 

The Committee would urge that more attention 
should be paid by Metropolitans and Bishops, or 
persons temporarily administering the affairs of a 
Diocese, to the practical enforcement of the principles 
above enunciated ; and they would add in particular 
the following recommendation —namely, that the 
Archbishop of Canterbury be respectfully requested 
to consider whether it be possible to devise and 
suggest any means whereby it may be made more 
easy to avoid the intrusion of unworthy or pretended 
Priests or Deacons into the various Dioceses of the 
Anglican Communion. 

II. It has been brought under the notice of the 
Committee that difficulty has arisen with regard to 
the validity of orders derived from certain Bishops 

Mutual Relations. 323 

alleged to be schismatical. It would be exceedingly 
desirable that some definite and uniform course of 
action should be adopted by all Bishops of the 
Anglican Communion in dealing with persons holding 
such so-called orders. 

The Committee are of opinion that, although much 
may have been said to the contrary, there are in 
reality no persons claiming Anglican Orders of 
doubtful character whose claims deserve serious con- 
sideration. With regard to Orders alleged to be 
derived, though irregularly, through the American 
Church, it may be sufficient to say that the whole 
transaction is disallowed and regarded as null and 
void by the American Episcopate. This fact, in the 
opinion of the Committee, may be taken as a sufficient 
guide to all Bishops of the Anglican Communion. 

III. A question has been brought before the Com- 
mittee, based upon a Report made to the General 
Synod of the Dioceses in Australia and Tasmania, on 
the subject of the title of Archbishop. The Committee 
have been asked to express an opinion as to the 
desirability of assigning the title of Archbishop to the 
Primate of Australia and Tasmania. The Committee 
feel that there is great difficulty in coming to a clear 
judgment upon a question which must, of necessity, 
to some extent depend for its answer upon local 
circumstances ; but taking the question upon broad 
grounds, and looking to the general interests of the 
whole Church, the Committee have no hesitation in 
expressing their opinion that there are cases of im- 
portant Provinces in which distinct advantages would 
result from adopting the ancient and honoured title 
of Archbishop. In the event of this course being 
adopted weighty questions might arise with regard 
to authority and precedence, but upon these questions 
the Committee think that it would be unwise to 

IV. The Committee have given anxious considera- 

324 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

tion to the question of the formation of a central 
Council of Reference, to which recourse may be had 
for advice on questions of doctrine and discipline by 
the tribunals of appeal of the various Provinces of the 
Anglican Communion. 

With reference to this question, which has already 
been before the Conferences of 1867 and 1878, the 
Committee think that they cannot do better than call 
attention to what has actually been done in the case 
of Australia and Tasmania. 

The following resolutions were adopted by the 
General Synod of Australia and Tasmania in 
1872 :— 

If, in the opinion of the Committee of Appeal of 
the General Synod of the Church of England 
in Australia and Tasmania, the matter of 
appeal concerns a question of doctrine, or 
discipline involving a question of doctrine, the 
Committee may, at its discretion, state a case 
for the opinion thereon of a body in England, 
to be called the Council of Reference. Such 
Council of Reference shall consist of the 
Archbishops of Canterbury and York, and the 
Bishop of London, together with four lay- 
men learned in the law, the first four such 
laymen being Lord Hatherley, Lord Chelms- 
ford, Lord Cairns, and Lord Penzance. The 
General Synod shall have power to fill up 
vacancies as they shall from time to time 
occur, but in the event of a vacancy or vacancies 
existing when a case shall be before the 
Council, the Archbishops and Bishop shall fill 
up the same for the purpose of disposing of 
that particular case. The opinion of the 
Council shall be binding on the Committee, 
and pending the obtaining of such an opinion, 
the appeal-shall stand adjourned, with liberty 
to either of the parties to set the appeal down 

. Mutual Relations. 325 

to be disposed of upon the opinion when 
obtained. If from any cause it shall be imprac- 
ticable to obtain an opinion from the Council 
of Reference within a time to be limited by 
the rules to be made under the resolutions, the 
Committee of its own motion may, or at the 
instance of either of the parties shall, deter- 
mine the appeal; but in such case the con- 
currence of one of the two Bishops shall be 
requisite in any decision. 

The Committee are of opinion that ἃ plan of 
reference to a Council in England, framed upon such 
principles as those adopted by the General Synod of 
Australia and Tasmania, would probably meet the 
wants, should they arise, of other Provinces. 

It has been brought to the attention of the Com- 
mittee that, in some parts of the Anglican Communion, 
notably, in the Province of the West Indies, schemes 
somewhat different from that above described have 
been adopted. It is needless to say that the Committee 
do not desire to pass an opinion upon details, but 
only to indicate a general method of action. 

V. The attention of the Committee has been further 
directed to the danger of important divergences with 
regard to matters of doctrine, as well as forms of 
worship, being introduced ‘amongst the Anglican 
Churches by the possible assumption on the part of 
each Province or Diocese of the power of revising the 
Book of Common Prayer. Such divergences might 
be injurious to the Church at large, and would 
certainly interfere with the mutual relations of its 
different parts. 

It is not within the province of the Committee to 
lay down rules as to the powers of the different 
branches of the Anglican Communion in this matter, 
or as to the line of action which they ought to follow. 
This remark applies with especial emphasis to the 
Episcopal Church of America, though the Committee 

326 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

cannot abstain from remarking with pleasure that 
recent changes made in the Book of Common Prayer 
by that Church have been rather in the direction of 
nearer approach to the English Book than of further 
departure from it. But with regard to the branches 
of the Church within the limits of her Majesty’s 
dominions, the Committee cannot express too strongly 
the opinion which they entertain with regard to the 
danger of alteration in existing services. They do 
not deny in general that the Book of Common 
Prayer may be susceptible of improvement; this 
susceptibility may probably be predicated of all 
things human; though it must be remembered that 
it might be hard to find many improvements, which 
would be generally and heartily accepted as such. 
Neither do they wish to express an opinion unfavour- 
able to efforts made to supplement the prayers and 
services of the Church by others which her needs 
demand. But the point which the Committte would 
chiefly urge is this—that the Book of Common Prayer 
is not the possession of one Diocese or Province, but 
of all; that a revision in one portion of the Anglican 
Communion must, therefore, be extensively felt, and 
that it is not just that any particular portion should 
undertake revision without consultation with other 
portions, and especially with the Church at home. 

VI. There appears to be a notion current that 
Clergymen ordained for work in England, who go 
out to labour for a time in the Colonies, are regarded 
as more or less disqualified for subsequent preferment 
at home. The Committee regret that such a notion 
should be current, and they are of opinion that 
Clergymen who have been willing to give a portion of 
the best time of their lives to colonial work may be 
regarded as having special claims for consideration 
on their return home. The Committee are aware 
that the subject is not free from difficulties, and that 
it is impossible to lay down any general rule; but 

Mutual Relations. 327 

they have thought it right to give it a place in their 
Report, and that some benefit may arise from the 
course thus adopted. 

These are all the matters which have been brought 
under the notice of the Committee, or which have 
been deemed of sufficient importance or of a suitable 
kind to be brought.before the Conference. In con- 
cluding their Report the Committee would desire to 
express their sense of the extent and difficulty of the 
subject which has been entrusted to them, and of the 
modest character of their contribution to its treatment. 
But they believe that the wise and perhaps the only 
course of dealing with such a subject is not to attempt 
to lay down rules which shall solve all possible 
problems, but to discuss practical difficulties as they 
arise, in dependence upon the Holy Spirit of God 
and trusting that He who permits the difficulties will 
give grace and strength to overcome them. 

Signed on behalf of the Committee, 

- Chatrman. 

328 Lambeth Conference of 1838. 

No. 8. 

ANOTHER subject has been brought under the notice 
of the Committee, concerning which they have felt 
great doubt as to whether it can be regarded as 
coming within the terms of their reference. The 
subject, however, is so important, and the Committee 
have felt so desirous that it should be fairly brought 
before the Conference, that they have determined to 
introduce it in the form of an Appendix to their 

The question was raised in the first meeting of the 
Conference, whether it would not be desirable that 
some declaration should be made concerning the 
teaching of the English Church, and of those Churches 
which are in full communion with her. 

There can be little doubt as to the existence of 
much ignorance and misunderstanding, not only as 
to what this teaching is, but also as to the ground 
upon which those Churches stand, and as to their 
relation to other Churches and Christian Societies. 
Such ignorance and misunderstanding can scarcely 
fail to interfere seriously with the results of their 

It is true that the English Church possesses a body 
of teaching in the Book of Common Prayer, in the 
Catechism, and in the Thirty-nine Articles, to say 
nothing of the Book of Homilies. But these reposi- 
tories of teaching, precious as they are, do not appear 
to the Committee to possess the qualities which 
ought to belong to a declaration, such as is contem- 
plated in the remarks now made. What is wanted is 
a plain and brief summary of the definite doctrinal 
grounds upon which the Anglican Churches stand 

Mutual Relations.—Appendix. 329 

(somewhat, perhaps, after the manner of the earlier of 
the Thirty-nine Articles), together with a statement 
of their relation to other Churches and Christian 
Societies, and, perhaps, of other cognate matters 
upon which, on consideration of the whole subject, it 
might be considered desirable that some distinct 
utterance should be made. The summary should 
be such as the whole body of English-speaking 
Bishops could adopt; it should, therefore, be free 
from all questions of doubtful controversy ; it should 
be a document which could be freely circulated as a 
manifesto of the Anglican Churches concerning their 
status and their teaching. 

The proposal, undoubtedly, has its difficulties, as 
almost every important proposal has; but we think 
that the difficulties might possibly be overcome; and 
certainly all danger of mischief would be avoided, if 
the following plans were adopted :— 

It is respectfully suggested : 

(1) That a small committee of English Bishops be 
appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury for the 
purpose of drafting such a declaration. 

(2) That the Committee have power to consult, if 
they think fit, with any of their episcopal brethren, 
we also with eminent divines outside the episcopal 


(3) That the draft declaration, having been pro- 
visionally settled by the Committee, be submitted to 
the Archbishop of Canterbury, with the request that 
his Grace will forward copies to each Metropolitan 
for the consideration of the Bishops in his Province, 
and that he will, in conjunction with the Archbishop 
of York, bring the declaration before the English 

[The term Metropolitan includes Primates of 
Provinces, the Primus of Scotland, and the Presiding 
Bishop of the Church of America. | 

(4) That each Metropolitan be requested to return 


330 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

a copy of the declaration, either approved, or with 
suggestions of amendment, within twelve months. 

(5) That the Archbishop of Canterbury, be re- 
quested upon the return of the drafts to take such 
further steps as the circumstances in his judgment 
shall appear to warrant. 

The Committee recommend that the declaration 
should be in the form of a series of statements or 
articles ; each dealing with a different subject, and 
to be expressed in the simplest possible language. 

The Committee feel that they would be going 
beyond their province if they attempted to dictate 
the subjects upon which statements should be framed: 
but in order more clearly to indicate the kind of 
declaration which they think the needs of the time 
demand, they venture to specify the following subjects 
which they believe might be profitably introduced :— 

I. Of the Catholic Faith. 
II. Of the Holy Scriptures. 
III. Of the Sacraments. 
IV. Of the Forms of Prayer and Liturgy in 
use in the Anglican Churches. 
V. Of the relation of the Anglican Churches 
to the Church of Rome. | 
VI. Of the relation of the Anglican Churches 
to the Churches of the East. 
VII. Ofthe relation of the Anglican Churches to 
other Christian Churches and Societies. 
VIII. Of the relation of the teaching of the 
Church of Christ to human knowledge. 

It is almost unnecessary to state that the Committee 
do not regard the above list as exhaustive ; nor, on 
the other hand, do they desire to insist upon each 
and all of the suggested subjects as essential to the 
completeness of the proposed declaration. 

Signed on behalf of the Committee, 


Flome Reunion. 331 



THE Committee was appointed to consider “what 
“steps (if any) can be rightly taken, on behalf of the 
“ Anglican Communion, towards the Reunion of the 
“various bodies into which the Christianity of the 
“English-speaking races is divided.” 

I. On entering upon their duty they had at once 
brought to their notice evidence of a strong consensus 
of authoritative opinion, from various branches of 
the Anglican Communion, that the time for some 
action in this matter, under prayer for God’s guidance 
through many acknowledged difficulties and dangers, 
has already come; and that the Conference—speak- 
ing, as it must speak, with the greatest weight of 
moral authority—should not separate without some 
such utterance as may further and direct such action. 

* Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
Bishop of Sydney (Chazrman). Bishop of Minnesota. 

» Adelaide. » Nelson. 

» Antigua (Coadjutor). » New York. 

» Brechin. » Ripon 

» Edinburgh. » Rochester. 

» Hereford, »  Rupertsland. 
» Jamaica. » ot. Andrew’s. 
» Lichfield. » Wakefield. 

» Manchester. 

332 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

In the Convocation of Canterbury the subject has 
been under discussion, at intervals, for nearly thirty 
years. In the year 1861 a resolution, on the motion 
of the Rev. Chancellor Massingberd, was carried 
nem. con. in the Lower House, praying the Bishops 
to commend the subject of “the Reunion of the 
divided members of Christ’s Body ” to the prayers of 
the faithful. | 

In 1870, at the instance of the Lower House, a 
Committee was appointed on Reunion, with power 
to confer with any similar Committee which might be 
appointed in the Northern Province. The Committee, 
in its Report, recommended the use of the special 
Prayer for Unity, appointed for the day of the 
Queen’s Accession, and the consideration of the 
propriety of communication on the subject with the 
chief Nonconformist bodies ; and these recommend- 
ations, after a singularly interesting debate were 
adopted by the House. 

The Report contained the following passage :— 
“ The Committee do not recommend that we should set 
“out with proposing alterations of our existing formu- 
“aries of faith and worship, while they by no means 
“deny that concessions might. be admitted hereafter, 
“85 the consequence of negotiations carried on ina 
“spirit of love and unity.” It also suggested that on 
the day of the Queen’s Accession “all classes of 
Nonconformists should be invited to institute similar 
prayers” for unity, and that the subject might be 
brought by Sermons before our own people. 

In 1887 the subject was again taken up, and a 
Resolution carried, on the motion of Canon Medd, 
that “ His Grace the President be requested to direct 
“the appointment of a Committee of this House to 
“ consider, and from time to time to report upon, the 
“relations between the Church and those who in this 
“country are alienated from her Communion; and 
“generally to make suggestions as to means which 
“might tend, by God’s blessing, to the furtherance of 

Home Reunion. 333 

“the Reunion of all among our countrymen: who 
“hold the essentials of the Christian faith.” In 
the speech of the mover of the resolution special 
reference was made to the probability of the dis- 
cussion of the subject at the Lambeth Conference. 

In the Convocation of York, the Committee have 
reason to know that similar action has been taken ; 
but, under pressure of time, they have been unable to 
obtain detailed information of the actual proceedings. 

From various Synods of the Colonial Church 
similar, and even stronger, expressions of a desire to 
make some movement on the part of the Anglican 
Communion in this direction have been brought 
before the Committee. The General Synod of the 
Church in Australia and Tasmania, in 1886, “desired 
“to place on record its solemn sense of the evils of the 
“ unhappy divisions among professing Christians, and, 
“through His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, 
“respectfully prayed the Conference of Bishops, to 
“be assembled at Lambeth in 1888, to consider in 
“what manner steps should be taken to promote 
“greater visible unity among those who hold the 
“same Creed.” A Resolution was passed in almost 
the same words by the Diocesan Synod of Montreal ; 
and similar Resolutions by the Provincial Synod of 
Rupertsland, and the General Synod of New Zealand. 
At the Session of the Provincial Synod of Canada 
in 1886, a Joint Committee was appointed, to confer 
with any similar Committees, which might be 
appointed by other Religious Bodies, on the 
terms upon which some honourable union might be 
arrived at. : 

But the most important and practical step has been 
taken by our brethren of the American Church in 
the General Convention of 1886, in accordance with 
the prayer of a petition signed by more than a 
thousand Clergy, including thirty-two Bishops. At 
that Convention a Committee of the House of Bishops 
presented a remarkable Report, which, after stating 

334 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

emphatically that the Church did “ not seek to absorb 
“other Communions, but to co-operate with them on 
“the basis of a common Faith and Order, to dis- 
“countenance schism, and to heal the wounds of the 
“Body of Christ”; and that she was prepared to 
make all reasonable concessions on “all things of 
“human ordering and of human choice,” dwelt upon 
the duty of the Church to preserve, “as inherent 
“parts of the sacred deposit of Christian faith and 
“order committed by Christ and His Apostles to the 
“ Church, and as therefore essential to the restoration 
“of unity,” the following :— 

“αι The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New 
Testament, as the Revealed Word of God. 

“2. The Nicene Creed, as the sufficient statement 
of the Christian Faith. 

“3. The two Sacraments—Baptism and the Supper 
of the Lord—ministered with unfailing use of Christ’s 
words of institution, and the elements ordained by 

“4. The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in 
the methods of its administration to the varying needs 
of the nations and peoples called of God into the 
Unity of His Church.” 

The Report concluded with the following words :— 

“Furthermore, deeply grieved by the sad divisions 
which afflict the Christian Church in our own land, 
we hereby declare our desire and readiness, so soon 
as there shall be any authorised response to this 
Declaration, to enter into brotherly conference with 
all or any Christian bodies seeking the restoration 
of organic Unity of the reat with a view to the 
earnest study of the conditions, under which so price- 
less a blessing might happily be brought to pass.” 

This Report was adopted by the House of Bishops, 
and communicated to the House of Clerical and Lay 
Deputies ; and, at the instance of the latter House, it 
was resolved— 

“That a Commission consisting of five Bishops 

Home Reunion. 335 

“five Clerical, and five Lay Deputies, be appointed, 
“who shall at their discretion communicate, to the 
“organised Christian Bodies of our country, the 
“ Declaration set forth by the Bishops on the twentieth 
“day of October; and shall hold themselves ready 
“to enter into brotherly conference with all or any 
“Christian Bodies seeking the restoration of the 
“organic unity of the Church.” 

After consideration of these significant documents, 
and of memorials from certain Associations which 
have already done good service in this cause, it was 
decided by the Committee that they were more 
than justified in recommending to the Conference 
that some steps should be taken by it in the direction 
specified in the Resolution constituting the Com- 

II. In considering how this could best be done, it 
appeared to the Committee that the subject divided 
itself naturally into two parts; first, the basis on 
which the United Church might, in the future, safely 
rest ; secondly, the conditions under which present 
negotiations for reunion, in view of existing circum- 
stances, could be carried on. 

The Committee with deep. regret felt that, under 
present conditions, it was useless to consider the 
question of Reunion with our brethren of the Roman 
Church, being painfully aware that any proposal for 
reunion would be entertained by the authorities of 
that Church only on condition of a complete submis- 
sion on our part to those claims of absolute authority, 
and the acceptance of those other errors, both in 
doctrine and in discipline, against which, in faithful- 
ness to God’s Holy Word, and to the true principles 
of His Church, we have been for three centuries 
bound to protest. 

But, in regard to the first portion of the subject, 
the Committee were of opinion that with the chief of 
the Non-conforming Communions there would not 

336 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

only be less difficulty than is commonly supposed as 
to the basis of a common faith in the essentials of 
Christian doctrine, but that, even in respect of Church 
Government, many of the causes which had originally 
led to secession had been removed, and that both from 
deeper study and from larger historical experience, 
there was in the present day a greater disposition to 
value and to accept the ancient Church order. It 
did not, indeed, appear to them that the question 
before them, which was of the duty, if any, of the 
Anglican Communion in this matter, was to be 
absolutely determined by these considerations ; but 
they seemed, nevertheless, to give important en- 
couragement to the Church in the endeavour to do 
what might appear to be her duty in furthering this 
all-important matter. 

Accordingly, after careful consideration, they deter- 
mined to take as the basis of their deliberations on 
this part of the subject the chief articles embodied in 
the Report of the Committee of the House of Bishops 
in the American Church; and after discussion of 
each, they submit them to the wisdom of the Confer- 
ence, with some modifications, as supplying the basis 
on which approach might be, under God’s blessing, 
made towards Reunion :— 

1. The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New 
Testaments, as “containing all things necessary to 
salvation,’ and as being the rule and ultimate stan- 
dard of faith. 

2. The Apostles’ Creed,as the Baptisimal Symbol ; 
and the Nicene Creed, as the sufficient statement of 
the Christian faith. 

3. The two Sacraments ordained by Christ himself 
—Baptism and the Supper of the Lord—ministered 
with unfailing use of Christ’s words of institution, 
and of the elements ordained by him. 

4. The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in the 
methods of its administration to the varying needs of 

Home Reuntion. 337 

the nations and peoples called of God into the unity 
of His Church. 

The Committee believe that upon some such basis 
as this, with large freedom of variation on secondary 
points of doctrine, worship, and discipline, and without 
interference with existing conditions of property and 
endowment, it might be possible, under God’s gracious 
providence, for a United Church, including at least 
the chief of the Christian Communions of our people, 
to rest. 

III. But they are aware that the main difficulty of 
the subject lies in the consideration of what practical 
steps can be taken towards such reunion under the 
actual religious conditions of the community at home 
and abroad—complicated, moreover, in England and 
Scotland by legal difficulties. It appears to them, 
moreover, clear, that on this subject the Conference 
can only express an opinion on general principles, 
and that definite action must be left to the consti- 
tuted authorities, in each branch of our Communion, 
acting, as far as possible, in concert. 

They therefore respectfully submit to the Confer- 
ence the following Resolution :— 

“That the constituted authorities of the various 
“branches of our Communion, acting, so far 
“as may be, in concert with one another, 
“be earnestly requested to make it known 
“that they hold themselves in readiness to 
“enter into brotherly conference (such as 
“that which has already been proposed by 
“the Church in the United States of 
“ America) with the representatives of other 
“chief Christian Communions in the 
“English-speaking races, in order to con- 
“sider what steps can be taken, either 
“ towards corporate reunion, or towards such 
“relations as may prepare the way for fuller 
“organic unity hereafter.” 

338 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

IV. They cannot conclude their report without 
laying before the Conference the following suggestion, 
unanimously adopted by the Committee :— 

“That the Conference recommend as of great 
“importance, in tending to bring about Re- 
“union, the dissemination of information 
“respecting the standards of doctrine, and 
“the formularies in use in the Anglican 
“Church; and that information be dis- 
“seminated, on the other hand, respecting 
“the authoritative standards of doctrine, 
“worship, and government adopted by the 
“other bodies of Christians into which the 
“ English-speaking races are divided.” 

They also desire—following in this respect the 
example of the Convocation of Canterbury—to pray 
the Conference to commend this matter of Reunion 
to the special prayers of all Christian people, both 
within and (so far as it may rightly do so) without 
our Communion, in preparation for the Conferences 
which have been suggested, and while such Confer- 
ences are going on; and they trust that the present 
Lambeth Conference may also see fit to issue, or to 
pray His Grace the President to issue, some pastoral 
letter to all Christian people, upon this all-important 
subject. For never certainly did the Church of 
Christ need more urgently the spirit of wisdom and 
of love, which He alone can bestow, who is “the 
Author and Giver of all good things.” 

Signed on behalf of the Committee, 


Old Catholics and Others. 339 

No. 10. 




YOUR Committee consider that, in view of the in- 
‘creasing number of Swedes and other Scandinavians 
now living in America and in the English Colonies, 
as well as for the furtherance of Christian Unity, 
earnest efforts should be made to establish more 
friendly relations between the Scandinavian and 
Anglican Churches. 

In regard to the Swedish Church, your Committee 
are of opinion that, as its standards of doctrine are 
to a great extent in accord with our own, and its con- 
tinuity as a national Church has never been broken, 
any approaches on its part should be most gladly 
welcomed with a view to mutual explanation of 
differences, and the ultimate establishment, if possible, 
of permanent intercommunion on sound principles of 
Ecclesiastical polity. 

Greater difficulties are presented as regards com- 

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 

Bishop of Winchester Bishop of Dunedin. 
(Chairman). s Gibraltar. 
Archbishop of Dublin. os Iowa. 
Bishop of Albany. ᾽ν Lichfield. 
μ᾿ Cashel. τ Lincoln. 
ἐν Central Africa. Ai North Carolina. 
ἮΝ Cork. τὶ Salisbury. 

ἐς Derry. ὡ Western New York. 

340 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

munion with the Norwegian and Danish Churches by 
the constitution of their ministry; but there are 
grounds of hope, in the growing appreciation of 
Church order, that in the course of time these diffi- 
culties may be surmounted. It is much to be desired 
that a basis of union should be formed with a people 
who are distinguished by great devotional earnestness 
and uprightness of character. 


By the name Old Catholics we understand, in 
general terms, those members of foreign Churches 
who have been excommunicated on account of their 
refusal, for conscience’ sake, to accept the novel 
doctrines promulgated by the authority of the Church 
of Rome, and who yet desire to maintain in its 
integrity the Catholic Faith, and to remain in full 
communion with the Catholic Church. As in the 
previous Conference, held in 1878,! we declare that 
“all sympathy is due from the Anglican Church to 
“the Churches and individuals protesting against 
“these errors”; and, “to those who are drawn to us 
“in the endeavour to free themselves from the yoke 
“of error and superstition we are ready to offer all 
“help and such privileges as may be acceptable to 
“them and are consistent with the maintenance of 
“ our own principles, as enunciated in our formularies.” 

Ten years have passed since this declaration was 
issued, and we are now called to consider more in 
detail our relations to the different groups compre- 
hended under this general title. 


First of all it is due to the ancient Church of Hol- 
land, which in practice accepts the title of Old 

* Official Letter of 1878. Supra, page 181. 

Old Catholics and Others. 341 

Catholic, to recognise the fact that it has uttered 
energetic protests against the novel dogmas of the 
Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, 
and of the universal Bishopric and infallibility of the 
Bishop of Rome. It is to this Church that the com- 
munity, usually termed Old Catholic, in the German 
Empire, owes in the providence of God the Episcopal 
succession. We recognise, with thankfulness, the 
dignified and independent position which the Church 
of Holland maintained for many years in almost 
absolute isolation. It has now broken through this 
isolation, as regards its neighbours on the Continent. 
As regards ourselves, the Church of Holland is found 
on inquiry to be in agreement with our Church in 
many points, and we believe that with more frequent 
brotherly intercourse many of the barriers which at 
present separate us might be removed. 


The Old Catholic community in Germany differs 
from the Church of Holland, in this respect, amongst 
others, that it does not retain possession of the 
ancient Sees. The Bishop of that community has 
wisely refrained from assuming a territorial title; we 
are not, however, without hope that the Old Catholic 
body may be, with the divine guidance and in God’s 
good time, instrumental in restoring to that country 
the blessing of a united national Church. It may be 
noted that Bishop Reinkens, shortly after his con- 
secration, was recognised as a Catholic Bishop by the 
civil power in Prussia, Baden, and Hesse.! He and 
the parochial Clergy under him have the right and 
duty, recognised by the State, of teaching the chil- 

1 The documents in question are printed at length in Der 
Altkatholikismus, published in 1887 by J. F. von Schulte, pp. 
405, 415, 416. The Prussian Old Catholic law is to be found on 
pp. nah Cf. pp. 549 foll. (Staatszuschuss fiir die Altkatho- 

342 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

dren of their own confession in the public schools. 
They are also in undisturbed possession of a number 
of ancient churches and benefices, and receive for the 
present a subsidy granted by Parliament. 

As regards the form of doctrine actually professed 
by this body, we believe that its return to the stan- 
dards of the undivided Church is a distinct advance 
towards the reunion of Christendom. We learn that 
it formulates the fuller expression of its belief in 
catechisms and manuals of instruction, rather than in 
articles or confessions, because it desires to avoid any 
methods which might create or perpetuate divisions. 

We cannot consider that it is in schism as regards 
the Roman Church, because to do so would be to 
concede the lawfulness of the imposition of new terms 
of communion, and of the extravagant assertions by 
the Papacy of ordinary and immediate jurisdiction 
in every Diocese. For ourselves we regard it as a 
duty to promote friendly relations with the Old 
Catholics of Germany, not only out of sympathy with 
them, but also in thankfulness to God, who has 
strengthened them to suffer for the truth under great 
discouragements, difficulties,and temptations. We owe 
them our intercessions, our support, and our brotherly 
counsel ; and we have reason to believe that aid from 
individual members of our Church, may be most 
beneficially given towards the training of their future 

We see no reason why we should not admit their 
Clergy and faithful Laity to Holy Communion on 
the same conditions as our own Communicants, and 
we also acknowledge the readiness which they have 
shown to offer spiritual privileges to members of our 
own Church. 

We regret that differences in our marriage laws. 
which we believe to be of great importance, compel 
us to state that we are obliged to debar from Holy 
Communion any person who may have contracted a 
marriage not sanctioned by the laws and canons of 

Old Catholics and Others. 343 

the Anglican Church. Nor could we, in justice to the 
Old Catholics, admit any one who would be debarred 
from communion among themselves. 


The “ Christian Catholic Church” in Switzerland, 
which has adopted a title long used by the Church 
in that country, has a recognised civil position of 
much the same character as that possessed by the Old 
Catholics of Germany. We consider that it is a body 
now sufficiently established to receive the assurance 
of the same sympathy and the offer of the same 
privileges from ourselves. 


The Old Catholic community in Austria has been 
recognised by the State as a distinct religious associa- 
tion, in accordance with the law of May 2oth, 1874.! 
Its constitution provides for the presidency of a 
Bishop, but no election has as yet taken place, not 
from any indifference on the part of its members, but 
on account of the difficulty of securing the stipend 
required by law. In the mean time it has many of 
the rights secured by law to the German body. The 
Austrian Old Catholics have made great sacrifices, 
and deserve great sympathy from us; which we hope 
may be expressed in a practical manner. They have, 
we believe, an important future before them, if rightly 
guided. Wecannot, however, regard the organisation 
in Austria as sufficiently tried and complete to 
warrant a more formal relation on our part at the 
present time. 


The same remark applies with even greater force 
to the smaller groups of brave and earnest men of the 

1'Von Schulte, Der Althatholikismus, p. 435. 

244 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

Latin races, driven under somewhat similar circum- 
stances to associate themselves in separate congrega- 
tions in Italy, France, Spain, and Portugal. We 
sympathise with their efforts to free themselves from 
the burden of unlawful terms of communion. We 
have reason to believe that there are many who think 
with them, but have not seen the way to follow the 
outward steps which thev have taken. We trust that 
in time they may be enabled to adopt such sound 
forms of doctrine and discipline and to secure such 
Catholic organisation as will permit us to give them 
a fuller recognition. We desire, in our outlook into 
the future, to call to mind the well-known declaration 
of the Gallican Clergy of 1862,' and also the advances 
made by Archbishop Wake in correspondence with 
the Doctors of the Sorbonne,’ towards establishing 

1 See Bossuet’s Défense de la Declaration du Clergé de 
France, ὅθε. 2 vols. 4to. Amsterdam, 1745, and Dupin’s 
Manuel du Droit public ecclésiastigue francais, pp. 97-100, 
ed. 5. Paris: Henri Plon, 1860. 

2 Archbishop Wake wrote as follows to Mr. Beauvoir, on 
November 18th, 1718, in regard to this correspondence :—‘ If 
‘*“ we could once divide the Gallican Church [from the Roman], a 
“reformation in other matters would follow as a matter of 
“course. The scheme that seems to me most likely to prevail, 
‘is, to agree in the independence (as to all matters of authority) 
*“of every national Church on any others ; and in their right 
“to determine all matters that arise within themselves ; and, 
‘“for points of doctrine, to agree, as far as possible, in all 
‘‘ articles of any moment (as in effect we already do, or easily 
‘‘ may); and, for other matters, to allowa difference till God shall 
ἐς bring us to a union in those also. One only thing should be 
‘* provided for, to purge out of the public offices of the Church 
“such things as hinder a perfect communion in the service of 
* the Church, that so, wherever any come from us to them or 
“ from them to us, we may all join together in Prayers and the 
“ Holy Sacraments with each other. Jn our Liturgy there is 
“ nothing but what they allow, save the single rubric relating 
“to the Eucharist ; in theirs nothing but what they agree may 
““ be laid aside, and yet the public offices be never the worse or 
‘‘ more imperfect for the want of it. Such a scheme as this I 

Old Catholics and Others. 345 

a basis for intercommunion between the Churches of 
France and England. If some such principles 
could now be revived, we have reason to believe that 
they would be welcomed by many both in France 
and Italy, and they might again form the basis of 
hopeful negotiations. 

In concluding this portion of our Report we feel it 
our duty to express the opinion that the consecration, 
by Bishops of our Communion, of a Bishop, to exer- 
cise his functions in a foreign country, within the 
limits of an ancient territorial jurisdiction and over 
the natives of that country, is a step of the gravest 
importance and fraught with enduring consequences, 
the issues of which cannot be foreseen. Whilst the 
right of Bishops of the Catholic Church to interpose 
under conditions of extreme necessity has always 
been acknowledged, we deprecate any action that 
does not carefully regard primitive and established 
principles of jurisdiction and the interests of the 
whole Anglican Communion. 


Lastly, the Committee have been asked at the last 
moment to consider the subject of the orders of the 
United Brethren, commonly called the Moravians. 
At the last Conference a number of the Bishops 
“were recommended to associate with themselves 
“such learned persons as they might deem eminently 
“qualified to assist them by their knowledge of the 

“take to be a more proper ground of peace at the begininng 
‘than to go to more particulars.” 

The correspondence of Archbishop Wake with Mr. Beauvoir, 
Dr. Dupin, Dr. P. Piers Girardin, and others, is printed in the 
fourth Appendix to Dr. Maclaine’s translation of Mosheim’s 

Church History, vol. vi., pp. 126, foll., London, 1828. The 
above letter will be found in full on p. 172, and is quoted in Rev. 
G. G. Perry’s History of the English Church, third period, 
p. 48, London, 1887. 


3246 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

“historical difficulties involved.”! These Bishops 
have not been able to act upon this recommendation, 
and no report is before the Conference. Your Com- 
mittee, in the short time allowed them, have not 
found it possible to inquire into the details of this 
subject with such care as would enable them to 
propose to the Conference any sufficient basis for the 
expression of an authoritative opinion. 

It must not, however, be overlooked that from 
time to time, up to the present day, very friendly 
relations have existed between Moravians and 
members of our Communion. In their greatest 
trials they have received from eminent English 
Bishops and Churchmen the sympathy and support 
due to a zealous body of Christians, imbued with a 
primitive spirit, and claiming to possess a valid 

The labours of Moravian Missionaries are ἀμνῶν 
to all the worid. We should therefore welcome any 
clearer illustration of their history and actual status 
on the part of their own divines. 

The subjects committed to the consideration of 
this Committee have embraced, as will be seen, a 
very wide range of interests, and we have reluctantly 
been compelled, on this account, to confine our 
Report almost entirely to the bodies specified in the 
terms of our commission. 

Signed on behalf of the Committee, 


1 Supra, page 183. 

Eastern Churches. 347 



YOUR Committee regard the friendly feelings 
manifested towards our Church by the Orthodox 
Eastern Communion as a matter for deep thankful- 
ness. These feelings inspire the hope that at no 
distant time closer relations may be established 
between the two Churches. Your Committee, 
however, are of opinion that any hasty or ill-con- 
sidered step in this direction would only retard the 
accomplishment of this hope. Our expectations of 
nearer fellowship are founded upon the friendly tone 
of the correspondence which the Archbishop of Can- 
terbury and his predecessors have held from time te 
time with Patriarchs of the Orthodox Church, and 
upon the cordiality of the welcome given by the 
Heads of that Church to Anglican Bishops and 
Clergy, such as the Bishop of Gibraltar, who have 
travelled in the East. Additional grounds of hope 
are furnished by the visit of Archbishop? Lycurgus 
to England in 1870, by the conversation which 
passed between him and the present Bishop of 
Winchester at Ely, by the words which Archbishop 

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :— 

Bishop of Winchester. Bishop of Limerick. 
(Chairman). ‘ Meath. 

Bishop Blyth. ἐν Springfield, 

Bishop of Gibraltar. ‘ Travancore. 

᾿ Iowa. 

3 Lycurgus, late Archbishop of Syra and. Tenos. 

348 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

Lycurgus used at the conclusion of the second 
Conference held at Bonn ;! and by the request which 
the Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem recently 
addressed to the Archbishop of Canterbury, that the 
Anglican Bishopric in Jerusalem should be re-con- 
stituted, and that the head-quarters of the Bishop 
should be placed in that city rather than at Beyrout 
or elsewhere. 

We reflect with thankfulness that there exist no 
bars, such as are presented to communion with the 
Latins by the formulated assertion of the infallibility 
of the Church residing in the person of the Supreme. 
Pontiff, by the doctrine of the Immaculate Concep- 
tion, and other novel dogmas imposed by the 
decrees of later Councils. 

We must congratulate the Christian world that, 
through the research of a Greek Metropolitan, 
literature has been lately enriched by the recovery 
of an ancient document which throws unexpected 
light upon the early development of ecclesiastical 

It would not be right, however, to disguise from 
ourselves the hindrances which exist on either side. 
The first and most formidable of these is the disputed. 
clause inserted in the Creed of Constantinople,. 

1 At the end of the Conference at Ely (1870), Archbishop 
Lycurgus said :— 

“When I return to Greece I will say that the Church of 
“England is not like other Protestant bodies. I will say that 
“1 15 ἃ sound Catholic Church very like our own; and I trust 
“that by friendly discussion union between the two Churches 
“may be brought about.” 

At the end of the Bonn Conference (1875), he said to 
Dr. Von Dollinger :— 

“In the name of all those of my own communion I thank 
“you, Mr. President, for your marvellous efforts in the work of 
“reuniting the several Churches, of bringing together again 
“the so numerous divisions of the Rock of our Redeemer. 
“Our joy is full; and there will be great joy in our homes 
“also. We earnestly pray God for His further blessing.” 

Eastern Churches. 349 

erroneously called the Nicene Creed, without any 
Conciliar authority, by the Latin Church. This 
clause, which has the prescription of centuries, and 
is capable of being explained in an orthodox sense, it 
may be very difficult to remove. Another barrier to 
full understanding between the Orthodox Eastern 
Church and ourselves would be the extreme im- 
portance attached by that Church to trine immersion 
in the rite of Baptism, which practice, however, there 
is nothing to prevent our Church from formally 
sanctioning. We, on the other hand, experience a 
somewhat similar difficulty as regards the Eastern 
rite of Confirmation, which we can hardly consider 
equivalent to ours, inasmuch as it omits the im- 
position of the Bishop’s hands, and is usually con- 
ferred upon unconscious infants ; yet we do not 
regard this as requiring members of the Orthodox 
Church to receive our Confirmation. It would be 
difficult for us to enter into more intimate relations 
with that Church so long as it retains the use of icons, 
the invocation of the Saints, and the cultus of the 
Blessed Virgin ; although it is but fair to state that 
the Greeks, in sanctioning the use of pictorial repre- 
sentations for the purpose of promoting devotion, 
expressly disclaim the sin of idolatry, which they 
conceive would attach to the bowing down before 
sculptured or molten images. Moreover, the decrees 
of the second Council of Niczea, sanctioning the use 
of icons, were framed in a spirit of reaction against 
the rationalising measures, as they were regarded, of 
the iconoclastic Emperors. The Greeks might be 
reminded that the decrees of that Council, having 
been deliberately rejected seven years afterwards by 
the Council of Frankfort, and not having been 
accepted by the Latin Church till after the lapse of 
two centuries, and then only under Papal influence, 
cannot be regarded as binding upon the Church. 
Your Committee would impress upon their fellow- 
Christians the propriety of abstaining from all efforts 

350 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

to induce individual members of the Orthodox 
Eastern Church to leave their own communion. If 
some be dissatisfied with its teachings or usages, and 
find a lack of spiritual life in its worship, they should 
be advised not to leave the Church of their baptism, 
but by remaining in it to endeavour to become centres 
of life and light to their own people; more especially 
as the Orthodox Eastern Church has never committed 
itself to any theory that would make it impossible to 
reconsider and revise its standard and practice. 

- Your Committee think it desirable that the Heads 
of that communion should be supplied with some 
authoritative document setting forth the historical 
facts relating to our orders and our position in the 
Catholic Church; as much misconception appears stil! 
prevail on this subject. Your Committee feel that 
the position which England now occupies in Cyprus 
and in Egypt places in our hands exceptional oppor- 
tunities of elevating the moral and spiritual life of our 
Eastern brethren. Especially may this be done by 
introducing or promoting higher education: any 
help given in this way we have reason to believe 
would be warmly welcomed. We rejoice to know 
that schools have lately been established at Constan- 
tinople and elsewhere for the purpose of supplying 
education to those who are in training for the ministry. 
In the more general diffusion of knowledge amongst 
the instructors of the people lies the best hope of that 
mutual understanding and esteem for which the 
Heads of the Orthodox Church have shown so much 
desire. , 

Your Committee cannot be expected to deal 
separately with the other Churches of the East, 
among which the Armenian appears to be the largest 
and most important. Approaches have been made 
to us from time to time by Bishops and other repre- 
sentatives of this communion, appealing for aid in 
support of educational projects for the instruction of 
their own people. The Armenian Church lies under 

Eastern Churches. 351 

the imputation of heresy. But it has always 
protested against this imputation, affirming the 
charge to have arisen from a misconception of its 
formularies. The departure from orthodoxy may, 
perhaps, have been more apparent than real; and 
the erroneous element in its creed appears now to 
be gradually losing its hold upon the moral and 
religious consciousness of the Armenian people. | 

In regard to other Eastern communities, such as 
the Coptic, Abyssinian, Syrian, and Chaldean, your 
Committee consider that our position in the East 
involves some obligations And if these communities 
have fallen into error, and show a lack of moral and 
spiritual life, we must recollect that but for them the 
light of Christianity in these countries would have 
been utterly extinguished, and that they have suffered 
for many centuries from cruel oppression and _per- 
secution. If we should have opportunity, our aim 
should be to improve their mental, moral, and 
religious condition, and to induce them to return to 
the unity of the faith without prejudice to their 
liberty. This we take to be the purpose of the 
Assyrian Mission set on foot by the late Archbishop 
of Canterbury, and continued by his successor. 

In conclusion, we would could call attention to the 
fact that in the East advance is slow, and even in 
the West we find differences perpetuate themselves, 
owing to national peculiarities, hereditary prejudices, 
and other causes, in spite of real wish for unity. We 
think that Christians need to be cautioned against 
impatience in expecting quick results. Such im- 
patience argues imperfect trust in the ultimate ful- 
filment of our Lord’s prayer for His people that they 
“all may be ONE.” 

Signed on behalf of the Committee, 


352 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 



IN considering the subject of the Authoritative 
Standards of Doctrine and Worship, which are the 
primary means of securing internal union amongst 
ourselves, and of setting forth our Faith before the 
rest of Christendom, we acknowledge first of all, with 
deep thankfulness to Almighty God, the vital and 
growing unity of the great Communion to which we 

We acknowledge also with the same _ heartfelt 
thankfulness the increasing intercourse which is 
taking place between our own Churches and other 
Churches of Christendom, and the extension of our 
own Communion into many non-Christian countries, 
to which God has especially called us to minister by 
the diffusion of the English-speaking race throughout 
the worid. 

The consideration of the new conditions thus 
created seems to call for a careful statement of our 
own position in regard to authoritative standards of 
doctrine and worship. 

' Names of the Members of the Committee :— 
Bishop of Ely (Chairman). Bishop of Meath. 

» Aberdeen. » Nassau. 

» Albany. »  Qu’Appelle. 

», Arkansas. 5,  Rupertsland. 

» . Derry. »» Salisbury. 

» Dover. » ot. David's. 

» Edinburgh. » sydney. 
Grahamstown. », | Western New York. 

Bishop in Japan. 

Authoritative Standards. 353 

This statement is divided into three parts :—first, 
as to standards of doctrine and worship which unite 
us with the great Body of the Church Universal ; 
second, as to those which regulate our internal union 
or should be imposed upon Missionary Churches ; 
third, as to a manual of doctrine for general use, but 
which should not be authoritative. 


We recognise before all things, and amidst all 
discouragements and divisions, the great bond of an 
essential unity which exists amongst all Christians 
who own the one Lord Jesus Christ as their Head 
and King, who accept the paramount authority of 
Holy Scripture, who confess the doctrine of the 
Nicene Faith, and who acknowledge one Baptism 
into the Name of the Blessed Trinity. 

But we cannot regard this measure of unity as ade- 
quately fulfilling our Lord’s prayer that His followers 
should be one, and we feel, therefore, that it is our 
duty to explain our own principles as regards 
standards of doctrine and worship, in the humble 
hope of preparing the way, so far as in us lies, for the 
reunion of Christendom. 

We have a duty to the Church Universal ; we have 
a duty also towards those who are now distinctly 
within our own Communion or who may hereafter be 
so closely allied to it as to form practically one body 
with ourselves. 

As in former Conferences,! we declare that we 
continue “united under one divine Head in the 
fellowship of the one Catholic and Apostolic Church, 
holding the one faith revealed in Holy Writ, defined 
in the Creeds, maintained by the primitive Church,” 
and “affirmed by the undisputed” Ccumenical 
“ Councils,” 

1 Supra, pp. 97 and 116. 

354 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

In defining our own position more explicitly we 

recognise, with the general consent of the Fathers 
that the canonical books of the Old and New Testa- 
ment “contain all things necessary to salvation,” and. 
are the rule and ultimate standard of all Christian 
« In addition to the Creed commonly called the 
Nicene Creed, to which we have already referred, we, 
as a part of the Western Church, have a common 
inheritance in the “ Apostles’ Creed,” confessed by us 
all in the Sacrament of Baptism. In like manner 
we accept the hymn Quzcunque vult, whether or not 
recited in the public worship of our Churches, as. 
resting upon certain warrant of Scripture, and as 
most useful, both at home and in our missions, in 
ascertaining and defining the fundamental mysteries. 
of the Holy Trinity, and of the Incarnation of our 
Blessed Lord; and thus guarding believers from 
lapsing into heresy. 

In relation to the doctrine of the Procession of the 
Holy Spirit, while we believe that there is no funda-- 
mental diversity of faith between the Churches of the 
East and West,! we recognise the historical fact that 
the clause Fz/zogue makes no part of the Nicene 
Symbol as set forth by the authority of the undivided 

We are of opinion that, as opportunity arises, it 
would be well to revise the English version of the 
Nicene Creed and of the Quzcunque vulz. 

We suggest to the’ Conference that the President 
be requested to appoint a Committee for this purpose. 

1 The Committee beg to refer, in illustration of this state- 
ment, to the important propositions, accepted by Members both 
of the Eastern and Western Churches, which were agreed to- 
at the Reunion Conference held at Bonn, August 16th, 1875, 
under the Presidency of Dr. J. J. I. von Ddllinger. See the 
Report of the Proceedings, &c., with a Preface by Dr. Liddon.— 
Pickering : London, 1876, pp. 103, 104. 

Authoritative Standards. 355 

With regard to the authority of the Gicumenical 
Councils, our Communion has always recognised the 
decisions of the first four Councils on matters of 
faith, nor is there any point of dogma in which it 
disagrees with the teaching of the fifth and sixth. 

The second Council of Niczea commonly called the 
seventh Council is, however, not undisputed, and 
while we recognise the historical circumstances of the 
eight century, which naturally led to the strong 
protest against iconoclasm made there, it is our duty 
to assert that our Church has never accepted the 
teaching of that Council in reference to the venera- 
tion of sacred pictures. 


From the standards of doctrine of the Universal 
Church which the whole Anglican Communion has 
always accepted,' we now pass to those standards of 
doctrine and worship which are specially the heritage 
of the Church of England, and which are, to a greater 
or less extent, received by all her sister and daughter 

' “Tet Preachers take care that they never teach anything 
in a sermon which they wish to be religiously held and believed 
by the people, except what is in accord with the doctrine of the 
Old or New Testament, and what the Catholic Fathers and 
ancient Bishops have collected from the same doctrine.”— 
Canon of 1571, concerning Preachers. 

“Such person ἄς. * * shall not in anywise have authority 
or power to order, determine or adjudge any matter or cause to 
be heresie, but onely such as heretofore have been determined, 
ordered or adjudged to be heresie, by the authority of the 
Canonical Scriptures or by the first four general Councils or 
any of them, or by any other general Counci] wherein the same 
was declared heresie by the express and plain words of the 
said Canonical Scriptures, or such as hereafter shall be ordered 
judged or determined to be heresie, by the High Court of 
Parliament of this realm, with the assent of the Clergy in their 
Convocation ; anything in this Act contained to the contrary 

1 Eviz.1 § XXXVI. 

256 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

Churches. These are the Prayer Book with its 
Catechism, the Ordinal, and the XXXIX. Articles 
of Religion. 

All these are subscribed by our clergy at ordination 
or admission to office, but the XX XIX. Articles are 
not imposed upon any person as a condition of 
communion. With respect to the Prayer Book and 
Articles, we do not consider it an indispensable 
condition of inter-communion that they should be 
everywhere accepted in their original form, or that 
the interpretation put upon them by local courts or 
provincial tribunals should be received by every 
branch or province of the Anglican Communion. In 
illustration of this principle, we would refer to the 
differences from the English Order of the Admini- 
stration of the Holy Communion which have long 
existed in the Scottish and American Churches, and 
to the facts that the XX XIX. Articles of Religion 
were only accepted in America in the year 1801 with 
some variations, and in Scotland in 1804, and that 
the Church of Ireland as well as the Church in 
America, has introduced some modifications into the 
Book of Common Prayer. | 
We, however, strongly deprecate any further 
material variation in the text of the existing Sacra- 
mental offices of the Church, or of the Ordinal, than 
is at present recognised among us, unless with the 
advice of some Conference or Council representing 
the whole Communion. 

With regard to the daily offices and such further 
forms of service as the exigencies of different 
Churches or countries may demand, we feel that they 
may be safely left for the present to the action of the 
Bishops of each Province. We do not demand a 
rigid uniformity, but we desire to see the prevalence 
of a spirit of mutual and sympathetic concession, 
which will prevent the growth of substantial 
divergences between different portions of our 
communion. With regard to those Dioceses which 
are not yet united into Provinces, we recommend 

Authoritative Standards. 357 

that the Bishop of the Diocese should not act in the 
way of revision of, or additions to, such offices 
without the advice of the Archbishop of Canterbury ; 
or in the case of foreign Missionary jurisdictions of 
the American Church, without the advice of its 
Presiding Bishop. 

With regard to the XX XIX. Articles of Religion 
we thank God for the wisdom which guided our 
fathers, in difficult times, in framing statements of 
doctrine, for the most part accurate in their language 
and reserved and moderate in their definitions. Even 
when speaking most strongly and under the pressure 
of great provocation, our Communion has generally 
refrained from anathemas upon opponents, and we 
desire in this to follow those who have preceded us in 
the faith. The omission of a few clauses in a few of 
the Articles would render the whole body free from 
any imputation of injustice or harshness toward those 
who differ from us. At the same time we feel that 
the Articles are not all of equal value, that they are 
not, and do not profess to be, a complete statement 
of Christian doctrine, and that, from the temporary 
and local circumstances under which they were 
composed, they do not always meet the requirements 
of Churches founded under wholly different conditions. 

Some modification of these Articles may therefore 
naturally be expected on the part of newly-constituted 
Churches, and particularly in non-Christian lands. 
But we consider that it should be a condition of the 
recognition of such Churches as in complete inter- 
communion with our own, and especially of their 
receiving from us our episcopal succession, that we 
should first receive from them satisfactory evidence 
that they hold substantially the same type of doctrine 
with ourselves. More particularly we are of opinion 
that the Clergy of such Churches should accept 
articles in accordance with the positive statements 
of our own standards of doctrine and worship, 
particularly on the substance and rule of faith, on 
the state and redemption of man on the office of the 

| 358 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

Church, and on the Sacraments and other special 
ordinances of our holy religion. 


In the foregoing resolutions we have confined our- 
selves to a consideration of existing authoritative 
formularies, and to such as may serve the like use 
under particular conditions. We are unable, after 
careful consideration of the subject, to recommend 
that any new declaration of doctrine should, at the 
present time, be put forth by authority. We are, 
however, of opinion that the time has come when an 
effort should be made to compose a manual for 
teachers which should contain a summary of the 
doctrine of the Church, as generally received among 
us. Such a manual would draw its statements of 
doctrine from authoritative documents already exist- 
ing, but would exhibit them in a completer and more 
systematic form. It would, also, naturally include 
some explanation of the Services and ceremonies of 
the Church. The whole might be preceded by a 
historical sketch of the position and claims of our 

Such a Manual would, we believe, be of great 
service both in maintaining the type of doctrine to 
which we have referred, and in enabling members of 
other Churches to form a just opinion of our doctrines 
and worship. We suggest that His Grace the 
President be requested to nominate three or more 
Bishops to undertake such a work, and, if it seem 
good to him and to the other Archbishops, Metro- 
politans, and presiding Bishops of the Church, that 
they give the work, when completed, the sanction of 
their imprimatur. We do not suggest that the 
Conference should be asked to undertake this work, 
or that it should beregarded as an authoritative 
standard of the Church. 

Signed on behalf of the Committee, 
ALWYNE ELY, Chatrman. 

Statement in regard to Dr. Cummiuiis. 359 


A Statement in regard to Ordinations or Consecrations 
performed by Dr. Cummins, or others claiming 
Ordination or Consecration from him, prepared 
by the presiding Bishop of the American Church, 
the Right Rev. John Williams, D.D., LL.D. 

“Bishop Cummins was consecrated as Assistant- 
Bishop of Kentucky, November 15th, 1866. In the 
autumn of 1873, he abandoned the Church, and 
announced his intention of setting up for himself. 
On the 12th of December, 1873, the Bishop of Ken- 
tucky (Dr. Benjamin B. Smith) withdrew authority 
from him, and inhibited him from the exercise of 
Episcopal dutuies,! nder, and in terms of, Title I., 
Canon I5, Sec. 5. 

Soon after this, probably on the day following, 
Bishop Cummins, assisted by four presbyters, went 
through some form of Consecration, by which he 
declared that the Rev. Charles E. Cheney, D.D., was 
elevated to the Episcopate. 

We have considered that in this, so called, Conse- 
cration, four things must be taken into account—(1) 
the condition of the Consecrator; (2) the act itself; 
(3) the service used; and (4) the condition of the 
person said to be consecrated. 

1.—Bishop Cummins had not been deposed, and 
therefore his act, however inconvenient, cannot, so 
far as he is concerned, be counted as having no force. 
He was, however, acting in the face of canonical 

An Assistant-Bishop shall perform such Episcopal duties, 
-and exercise such Episcopal authority in the Diocese, as the 
Bishop shall assign to him.—Title I., Canon 15, Sec. 5. 

360 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

2.—The Consecration itself is, clearly, utterly un- 
canonical, though, of course, not, fer se, invalid. 

3.—How far the Ordinal was used, whether any 
sufficient form was employed, we do not know. We 
do know, from open and clear declarations of avowed 
principles, that there was not even a pretence of 
ordaining and consecrating a Bishop in the meaning 
and intention of the Ordinal. We do not, of course, 
mean in this to affirm that a secretly! held and 
unexpressed intention zo¢t to do what the service pur- 
ported to do, would invalidate the act. In this 
instance, the purpose zot to do what the service 
purported to do was openly declared. Under such 
circumstances, if the Ordinal were used, the use of it 
was nothing short of a mockery. 

4.—As to the condition of Dr. Cheney, he was at 
that time under sentence of deposition, which sentence 
had been canonically pronounced upon him years 
before by his Diocesan, the Bishop of Illinois (Dr. 

1In referring to the intention of Bishop Cummins, the 
Bishops beg to be understood as not implying that an Officer 
of any Religious Body can invalidate his official act, by a lack 
of intention to use the Offices of that Body for the purposes for 
which they were authorised. This is a different case. Bishop 
Cummins had ceased to be an Officer of the Church in America. 
He was acting for himself. And he not only did not intend, 
but by his own statement he intended not to consecrate Dr. 
Cheney to the Episcopal Order. Proof of which is found in 
the subjoined extracts from his own sermon delivered on the 
occasion of the so-called consecration of Dr. Cheney. 

“There is no evidence from Scripture that the Apostles 
“ established the Episcopate as an order in the Ministry distinct 
“from and superior in rank to the Presbyterate. If there is to 
‘be found any trace of Episcopacy in the New Testament, it is 
“only as an office exercised by one who was himself a fellow- 
“ presbyter, commissioned or set apart for the exercise of such 
“powers as were rendered necessary by the exigencies of the 
“Church, and for the promotion of its well-being by a system 
“ of general oversight and superintendence. 

“What then is the true position of the Episcopate as it is 
“retained in this reformed Episcopal Church, following Holy 
“Scripture and the practice of the early Church? 

Statement in regard to Dr. Cummins. 361 

Whitehouse). In regard to the capacity, so to speak, 
of a deposed presbyter to be elevated to the Episco- 
pate (which was the crucial question touching Dr. 
Cheney), we found that in the well-known case of 
Timothy Aelurus, the Bishops of Cappadocia, writing 
to the Emperor Leo, asserted that Timothy was, as a 
deposed presbyter, incapable “ad majorem currere 
dignitatem” (Labbe and Cossart’s Concilia, vol. iv., 
col.956). Wealso found the Bishops of Galatia, writ- 
ing to the same Emperor, that a deposed presbyter 
was incapable ‘ad majorem gradum ventre”’ (ut sup., 
col. 970). 

We could not but regard this view as entirely 
reasonable and just. For, hold as strongly as we 
may to the indelibility of Holy Orders, grant as fully 
as we may that acts done by one, who having been 
deposed from an office still continues to do acts per- 
taining only to that office, though they are irregular, 
may be valid ; it surely does not follow, that such a 
person is capable of receiving additional power or of 

“1. It is not a continuation of the Apostolate. Bishops are 
** not the successors of the Apostles. The Apostles of our Lord 
““could have no successors, as their office was of special 
“appointment by Christ Himself, endowed with miraculous 
“ powers by the Holy Ghost, and could be filled only by those 
“‘ who were ‘ eye-witnesses of the majesty,’ and of the ‘ sufferings 
“ofJesus. Their Office ceased with their lives, and Holy 
“Scripture contains not a suggestion indicating that others 
‘*‘ could ever perpetuate their Office in the Church. 

“2, The Episcopate is not the depository of the Faith, the 
“ Divinely-constituted body to which are committed all gifts of 
“grace, as the sole channel through which they can be dis- 
“pensed. Holy Scripture warrants us in rejecting such teaching 
“as utterly antagonistic to the very spirit and essence of the 
** Gospel of the Son of God. 

“3. The Episcopate is not an ordinance of Apostolic institu- 
“tion, but it was adopted by the post-Apostolic Church as the 
‘development of the practice or custom first suggested by the 
“Apostles, in delegating to certain of their fellow-labourers 
“among the Presbyters the oversight or superintendence of the 
“Churches in certain districts temporarily.” 


362 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

being elevated to a higher grade in the ministry. 
The contrary conclusion would seem to be the more 
reasonable one, especially when fortified as it is by 
the foregoing facts. 

Considering, therefore, (1) the condition of the only 
person claiming the Episcopate who acted in the so- 
called Consecration ; (2) the extreme irregularity of 
the act itself, in performing which there was only one 
Bishop—and he the one just spoken of—present ; (3) 
the fact that presbyters were associated with him on 
the avowed ground that they were just as competent 
to act as a Bishop; (4) that we know not what service 
was used ; (5) that ifthe Ordinal were used zz verdis 
et actibus tpsissimis, it was still used not only with 
the secret intention, but with the avowed purpose, of 
not doing what it intended should be done; (6) that 
on grounds of reason and of precedent, we were 
compelled to regard Dr. Cheney as incapable of © 
being elevated to the Episcopate; we were, in a 
manner, forced to conclude that the act of Consecra- 
tion, so called, of Dr. Cheney, was zfso facto, null and 

But, further, on the 24th of February, 1876, Dr. 
Cummins and Dr. Cheney, assisted by one Methodist 
bishop, one Methodist minister, two Presbyterian 
ministers, and six members of the so-called “Re- 
formed Episcopal Church,” went through some form 
of consecration, by which they declared that the . 
Rev. W. R. Nicholson, D.D., was elevated to the 

The same questions that came up in connection 
with Dr. Cheney’s so-called Consecration arise here. 
It is enough, however, to say, in addition to what has 
been already said—-(1) that the condition of the so- 
called Consecrator had been changed—and for the 
worse—by the fact that on the 24th day of June, 1874, 
Dr. Cummins had been deposed by the Presiding 
Bishop, with the consent of a majority of the House 
of Bishops; (2) that the probabilities of an insufficient 

Statement in regard to Dr. Cummins. 363 

service and form are greatly increased by the char- 
acter and positions of those whose assistance he 
employed ; and (3) that Dr. Nicholson had been 
canonically deposed several months previous to this, 
so-called, Consecration. Our conclusion, therefore 
as to him, was the same as that to which we had 
before come in the case of Dr. Cheney. 

These two Consecrations, so called, are the only 
ones at which Dr. Cummins ever officiated ; and all 
later ones, as well as all Ordinations of presbyters 
and deacons, in what is known as the “ Reformed 
Episcopal Church,’ depend on them. For the 
reasons then, above given—without asserting that no 
other reasons have weighed with individual Bishops— 
the Bishops in the United States always ordain those 
who apply to be received from, what is commonly 
called, the “Cummins Schism,” into the Church.” 

At a meeting of the American Bishops present at 
the Lambeth Conference, the above statement of the 
Presiding Bishop was adopted as the statement of 
the Bishops present, and ordered to be presented to 
the Conference with the addition of the appended 
note, on page 360. 



Committee on behalf of the 
American Bishops. 


304 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

No. XXXVII. (See page 46.) 

Sermon preached by the Archbishop of Vork, in St. 
Paul's Cathedral, on Saturday, July 28, 1888. 

“For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the 
manifestation of the sons of God.”—Rom. viii. 19. 

THE Apostle in these grand chapters realises the 
coming of Christ as a power in the world. Christi- 
anity is not, with the Apostle, a saving truth, but a 
saving power which Christ has brought into the 
world. In chapter vii. he sees man divided and 
distracted, with light enough to see the right, but 
with will too weak to stand firm in it ; and then the 
greatness of the deliverance of the human will from 
the power of sin through Christ is contrasted with 
it. “QO wretched man that Iam! Who shall deliver 
me from the body of this death? I thank God 
through Jesus Christ our Lord” (vii. 24, 25). Law 
and peace have come through Him, and the quicken- 
ing of the mortal body through the in-dwelling Spirit. 
Sin is subdued and men are made children of God ; 
and if children then heirs; heirs of God, and joint 
heirs with Christ (viii. 16,17). But it is impossible 
for him not to contrast this ideal of freedom with 
the continuing sufferings of the present time. The 
creation is still waiting for a redemption, of which 
man shall be, in a measure, the instrument. The 
present suffering may well be borne, through the 
strength of the hope that is before us. Rising to a 
sublimer height of diction, the Apostle exclaims that 
“ The earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for 
the manifestation of the sons of God” (viii. 19). 

The Greek word used is a picture in itself. It is 
the expectation of a man with head erect, looking 
out afar towards the source from which the succour 

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 365 

is tocome. It presents to the eye the waiting of all 
creatures for the manifestation, or further work of 
the children of God; groaning meanwhile and travail- 
ing in pain. We ourselves who have received the 
Spirit groan with the pain of waiting for the complete 
redemption in us. “We are saved, indeed, in the 
way of hope” (viii. 24), for we still wait in patience. 
Persecution, temptation, the falling away of many, 
the martyrdom of many, the turning away of the 
stream of grace from whole districts and churches, 
leaving a barren wilderness in place of the dews and 
sweet pastures of the Gospel. For this consummation 
we pray for the complete fulfilment; but we know 
not what to pray for as we ought, blindly stretching 
forwards towards complete redemption. 

The Spirit helps our prayers, and “with groanings 
which cannot be uttered,” with yearnings within our 
souls to which we could give no adequate expres- 
sion, stretches forth towards the complete revelation, 
towards complete love, clearer knowledge, deeper 

Thus in the time of St. Paul the creation stood in 
expectation, with head erect, with far-off look, waiting 
for the dawn of that day which should make her 
deliverance through Christ complete. St. Paul knew 
not what would follow, that after eighteen centuries 
the expectant creation should still so stand, waiting 
for deliverance. Still the world is full of misery ; 
still it waits for redemption: it is as far off from 
peace as ever. Strife and struggle, pain and death, 
are inscribed upon the world’s foundation-stones. 
They are older than the fall of man. Long before 
man lived to be tempted and to fall, we find their 
history in the stone-book of creation. 

He who subjected the creature (creation) to vanity, 
to a progress by constant struggle and death towards 
a higher condition, in which life, and then man and 
self-consciousness and sin and the great redemption 
would come to pass, knew His own purpose in so 

366 _ Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

doing. The creation was made subject to vanity, 
that is, to constant change. But He who so made it 
knew the issue. He subjected the same in hope. 
Only in the way of hope can we yet understand the 
great story of the creation. 

St. Paul describes three stages of progress. Until 
the time of redemption, the whole creation groaned 
and travailed; and the growth and entombment of 
animal races, the geologic changes (some gradual, 
some paroxysmal), the appearance of man, the rise 
and ruin of Empires, the civilisations that bloomed 
and died down into desolation were but parts of its 
torments. There came, secondly, the time in which 
Paul writes, when the way of holiness and love was 
opened out, and new strength given to obey God. 

And now the Spirit helps the redeemed to pray 
for the last period, that of complete deliverance ; and 
still they know not fully what to pray for as they 
ought. And this last stage of waiting has been made 
bitter by the contamination of the Church itself by 
vanity ; that is, by strife and disunion, and loss of 
love. Already in St. Paul’s time, strife was not 
unknown. He did not see “ Diocletian’s fiery sword 
work busy as the lightning;” nor the Asiatic Churches 
of the Apocalypse swept away by Mahometan swords ; 
nor the apathy and faithlessness in the Church itself; 
nor the corruptions of practice which at times have 
obscured the faith, still held in words and still pro- 

We have waited nearly two thousand years, and 
the language held by those who have lost faith is 
that they can wait no more; that the power of Christ 
is no more seen. “ When the Hebrews,” says one 
of these writers, “were on their way to the promised 
land, they perceived that God was with them. God 
had spoken and had said, ‘It lies before you’; and 
by night a cloud of fire kindled and marched in their 
van. Now the celestial light is extinct. We are not 
quite sure that we have God over our heads. We 

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. .ο 367 

possess no other light but our understanding, and 
with this glimmering guidance we must direct our- 
selves through the night. Oh! that we could still 
be sure that there was a promised land; that others 
besides us would reach it; that this desert would 
end in something. This certainty is taken from us; 
and yet we advance continually, pushed forward by 
an indefatigable hope.”?! 

Beyond doubt, if the power of the Lord is gone, all 
is gone. He is not a doctrine; but a power. Sur- 
rounded by the sick and maimed, He heals them. 
When He speaks of the Divine Law He does not 
fear to complete and enlarge it. What is the power 
which enables men to live no longer to themselves ? 
“The love of Christ constraineth us,” replies St. Paul; 
and the word “constraineth” denotes a real com- 
pelling force. 

Examine the history of the Church for the first 
century, from the Day of Pentecost onwards. The 
records are scanty; but the world vibrated to the 
tread of that power. Historians hardly mention the 
name of Christ ; but the power is working. Ifit were 
indeed true that the power had spent itself ; that 
Christianity, like the moon among planets, were a spent 
region,—airless, waterless, lifeless—we should seek 
perforce another guide. But is itso? Gathered here 
from all corners of the earth, we ought to be able to 
find an answer. Has material civilisation supplanted 
faith? Let brothers answer from America, Australia, 
and New Zealand. They are colonies of yesterday : 
their first years were as always a struggle for bread. 
At first they gave refuge to our criminal class. They 
did not start with all the apparatus of a traditional 
religion. Nowallare the scene of flourishing churches. 
A Christian zeal more fruitful, in reference to popula- 
tion, by far than our own, has grown up on the soil. 
The feeling that civilisation is in itself sufficient for 

i Guyan, “ Irreligion de l’Avenir,” p. 337. 

368 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

human progress without religion, finds no counten- 
ance from this last chapter of the world’s history. 
The complaint now is not that the voice of religion is 
not heard ; but rather that the voices of jarring creeds 
aretoomany. The air is torn with the jangling bells 
of many churches. 

Apply what test you will: the test of numbers ; 
of holy works ; of saintly souls ; Christian progress is 
advancing, not receding. Missions have done more 
in this century than ever before. In a word, that 
thought which underlies St. Paul’s account—namely, 
that creation stood waiting for its own final redemp- 
tion, of which man should be the instrument, need 
not be abandoned now on the ground that man no 
longer shares the Divine strength. 

Is it then true, that the power of man is or ever 
can be able to work out, by Divine aid, the redemp- 
tion of creation ? 

Two lines of conquest over the powers of dark- 
ness go on together: the one overcoming physical 
obstacles, and the other spiritual. The physical pro- 
gress moves at an increasing rate. It began far back 
in history ; and depends on the mental energies of 
man. Even the Syrian desert is not mere sand and 
rock, but consists of excellent soil, desert only by 
reason of man’s neglect. The barren sides of Lebanon 
have once had beautiful terraces in high cultivation. 
The terraces remain, but the culture has ceased with 
man’s apathy or relapse towards barbarism. In all 
civilised countries the soil is useful exactly in the 
degree in which man’s energy defends it from return- 
ing to wildness. Modern discoveries have in two 
ways lengthened life: by preserving health on one 
side, and by crowding into a given time far more 

We, who could not be heard for 100 feet, can now 
speak under the ocean 3,000 miles. We can go and 
return in a single day over distances which to our 
great grandfathers would require a week ; and when 

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 369 

we think of what are called the Miracles of Science, 
we are exhilarated by the conviction that the dis- 
coveries of the next decade are likely to be more in 
number, and more wonderful than those of the last 
decade, over which we have not yet ceased to be 
astonished. All these conquests are gifts of God to 
man, and obtained through man. They are poured 
out profusely ; and at the same time they are educat- 
ing the race that discovers them into higher skill; 
and the race which produces more Newtons, and 
Watts and Nasmyths, more Harveys and Pasteurs, 
will become the channel of a greater flow of benefi- 
cent inventions. 

The other road of progress is the spiritual. On 
that road the pace is slower, the results more unequal, 
and there are intervals of heartbreaking failure, and 
retrogression. And yet the gifts of God are great. 
They cannot be overlooked or denied ; and they de- 
pend upon the action of man, on the vigour of his 
faith, on the completeness of his devotion. “ How 
shall they believe in Him of whom they have not 
heard ; and how shall they hear without a preacher.” 
The Most High speaks no more to us in prophetic 
vision, or by a voice from Heaven. He inspires souls 
with the power of His spirit; He accumulates, if I 
may Say so, in the vessel of man the Divine electric 
fire through which spiritual work must be done. 
There is no other way in the present course of His 
working. If there are no mez of faith, neither faith 
nor the fruits of faith can be upon the earth. When 
we are twitted with the languid life of the Christian 
Churches, as compared with the splendid activity and 
performance of science, the inference is not that there 
is no longer any guidance, for there is much; but 
that men who profess to be Christian show a languid 
and intermittent life, a hypothetical belief, instead of 
the Apostles’ categorical conviction; a perpetual com- 
promise with modern views ; an eyesight made false 
and double by the endeavour to work for double 

370 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

ends. How shall such an engine accomplish a sub- 
stantial share in the great reform and progress which 
it is at once the privilege and the duty of the Christian 
Church to carry on? The spiritual progress has 
never preserved in past centuries a steady and equal 
pace. No period of twenty years has ever equalled 
the grand outpouring of life of the first twenty years 
after the Resurrection. 

No century has been like the first. In the seventh 
century, churches that had once been faithful, had 
become deserts, sunless and dewless; fit only, as it 
seemed, to be visited with the destroying swords of 
Mohammed. But the law has always been the same. 
Churches have prospered when peopled by faithful 
men, they have languished or died when faith has 
languished and sin has paralysed the will. “The 
river of grace” never runs dry it is true; but it often 
changes its course to water new districts, and leaves 
in its old channel nothing but arid sands. Faith will 
never be extinct; but it is not tied to any of the 
places which it enlightens; it leaves behind it a 
frightful night to those who have despised the day, 
and it carries its rays to purer eyes. 

Let this be the last word which we all carry away 
from this our conference. Christ isa power; a power 
of faith and love, which wrought the salvation of the 
human race. He comes to us and imparts to us His 
nature; all the stages of his earthly history are re- 
peated in us: the tender infant birth of faith, the 
growth to perfect manhood, the temptations and the 
resistance and self-denial, the crucifixion of the old, 
and the resurrection to the new life, and the affections 
set thereafter upon things in heaven. If this union is 
real, if we have done nothing to weaken it, we are 
like Him; we are of Him; weare one with Him, and 
His power is with us. There is no other source of 
strength. And on the other hand, a nature so united 

1 Fenelon. 

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 371 

to the Lord cannot be hid, but must be strong and 
prevail, and a Church where such men are found 
must needs abound with the fruits of grace. To us, 
if the Apostle is right, the true progress of the world 
is committed, and the world is waiting even now for 
the manifestation of the sons of God. We turn from 
contemplating with pride the growth of churches, the 
number of chief pastors added to our counsels, the 
yearning after closer union one with another, to admit 
once more the fact that each of us stands with regard 
to his fellows, quite alone, either gifted with the spirit 
of Christ, and if so, a storehouse of Divine power for 
good ; or else having a name to live, whilst he has 
lost hold of the love of Christ, and then nothing can 
proceed from him,in whom is neither savour, nor 
will, nor strength. 

Now the sins and miseries which yet remain cannot 
be overcome by mere civilisation. The tools she can 
use suit not this work; the results she arrives at in- 
tensify the evils. Think of a single day in London: 
how human creatures groan and travail, knowing as 
yet no redemption by Divine or by any love, from sin 
and sorrow. The night closes over the day of struggle, 
but rest comes not with the dark. Men watch round 
death-beds, and while they sorrow feel that death, at 
least, is rest. .Houseless wanderers are fortunate who 
can sleep unobserved under a tree ; some of them (I 
know it) have learned to sleep upon their feet, to 
whom the doorstep is forbidden, who are only allowed 
such sleep as can consist with “moving on.” The 
servants of pleasure are still astir; the pleasure that 
is made up of drink and shameless appetite, which 
must not be called brutal in justice to the brute. 
Under cover of night, loves that are worse than 
hatreds work themselves out. Between the loud roar 
of day and the dull throbbing of night there is a 
difference, but sin never ceases in this crowd of four 
millions for whom Jesus did once surely die. Con- 
sider, too, the poverty as well as the sin: wealth was 

272 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

never greater; poverty was never more stark and 
grinding. Westwards there are streets and squares 
of palaces, charged to the full with every contrivance 
of luxury, such as no medizval queen could have 
dreamed of. Eastward there are dwellings far more 
numerous, upon which none of those luxurious in- 
ventions have lighted. In many of them a few help- 
less, shivering women try to keep continuous the 
miserable meals which barely stave off starvation 
upon the few daily pence which their work is judged 
to be worth. Our boasted progress has made both 
the wealth and the poverty. If the progress become 
more rapid, we do not see why the riches may not 
grow greater and the poverty more deadly. We com- 
passionate the poor; we are indignant with those 
who stand next them and do not seem to help; we 
wax angry with what is called the “ sweating system,” 
which, after all, is sometimes an attempt to brigade 
and organise in workshops a number of helpless crea- 
tures whose labour is so little worth that if it were 
not organised it would earn no wage at all. We have 
been considering, amongst other topics, the Socialism 
which is now making itself felt in every country. 
Socialism is not so much a system or a discovery, as 
an outcry of hungry despair. Its idea is that nothing 
can be worse than the present social state, and that 
any change, even through a universal conflagration 
of that system, must be an improvement, for what 
exists is evil beyond conception. Many of its reme- 
dies are childish and contradictory. A revival of old 
experiments that have failed ; abolish heirship and 
succession ; organise workshops without the power to 
dismiss useless workmen, and so on. Mere hunger 
lies at the root of Socialism. 

The terrible element of this question is that our 
present progress aggravates both extremes ; doubling 
the pile of the rich, and halving the wages of an in- 
creasing number of the poor. The quick progress of 
science does not help it. Against the slower progress 

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 373 

of spiritual improvement it is the chief resisting ele- 
ment. You cannot always shut your eyes to this 
terrible problem of the poor. You may not fear that 
they will ever destroy society, they are too weak and 
helpless for that ; but still, even the most flaccid con- 
science must be uneasy. We may sleep in our beds, 
because starving hands can brandish no weapon and 
kindle no torch; but still our sleep cannot be so 
sound if we know that brothers and sisters are starv- 
ing around us. Who has said, “ The murmurs of the 
poor are just. Why this inequality of conditions? 
Formed as we all are out of the same dust, there is no 
way of justifying this except in saying that God has 
commended the poor to the rich, and has assigned 
them their maintenance out of their superfluity.” It 
was not a communist. The words are the words of 

Now I repeat, that in these two fields, Social pro- 
gress is well-nigh powerless, and certainly cannot hope 
to bring out a social system from them which shall 
be agreeable to the law of love. Competitive trade, 
brilliant inventions, the hope of profit, have made 
many rich ; but in the nature of the case, the great 
commercial machine stands sometimes still, and then 
the capital of the rich remains ; but the labour, which 
is the capital of the poor, lies useless, and they starve. 
The power of Christ, on the other hand, which has 
wrought such wonders in the past, ennobling the 
family life, affirming the equal rights of all redeemed 
men, building the hospital, freeing the slave, organ- 
ising the care of the poor, exists still ; and if it seems 
weaker, it is owing to the weaker faith of His 
followers. Let us more actively affirm the doctrine 
of love to others; let us apply it to thoughtless 
marriages ; to intemperance ; to want of thrift—the 
chief causes of the helplessness of the people. Let 
us speak of avarice as our Lord and His Apostles 
speak of it, as a deadly sin; let us explain the sin- 
fulness of luxury; let us charge wealth with its 

374 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

proper trusts, its Christian claims; let us remind Dives 
that it is a sin against Christ even to refuse 20 think 
of Lazarus at the gate; and results as glorious will 
follow as those which attended the march of the 
Saviour in earlier times. Are there not facts to 
prove it? The great increase of expenditure on 
missions during this century ; the splendid examples 
of individual philanthropy ; all these teach us that at 
this moment we have not reached the summit of 
human endeavour, but only the first ridge from 
which we can see, not the downward slope, but alps 
rising behind alps, which we may not pronounce 
unattainable until we have tried them. Nor is our 
power over sin diminished. A hundred years ago, 
men classed with miracles the conversion of a Mag- 
dalen. Now you may call it a miracle still ; but it is 
part of the daily organised work of every complete 
church, and is blessed with daily success. A century 
ago the criminal class was looked on as hopeless, and 
was only dealt with by the severest repression ; now 
the reformatory snatches, in early boyhood, the pre- 
destined thief and social_pest, and trains them to 
good, and loads his neck with the beneficent yoke of 
the moral law, which he will not wish to cast off. We 
do not discuss it as a possibility ; it is part of the 
Church’s constant work. Every Christian man is a 
storehouse of the power and will of Jesus Christ. 

If we have failed to make Christ’s purpose known 
and to manifest His love, we must bear our own sin, 
and confess it; we must not say that the power of 
Christ has gone out of the world. It is not the men 
of high Christian endeavour, who come before us, 
whining that there is no guidance ; it is not the man 
of prayer, who announces that he has tried to find 
Christ in prayer, and failed to find Him. No! belief 
strengthens belief; fresh talents are added where 
talents are. The complaints that religion is ex- 
hausted come from those who have not striven to 
shape their life according to the truth they knew; 
weak, perplexed, exhausted, they are ready to be- 

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 375 

come the prey of the first who shall say, “ The world 
is dark and lost ; evil has conquered ; God we can- 
not know!” The power of Christ manifested in 
believers has conquered unbelief, has won over souls, 
in every age, in every country, against every hinder- 
ance. Christianity once consisted of five disciples 
that followed Christ: it has grown to a countless 
multitude. The work has been done between these 
two points by believing men. On the last night of our 
Lord’s ministry all the disciples “forsook Him and 
fled.” That is put before us, not without intention, as 
the result of His personal teaching, to show that the 
multitudes, whom no man can number, have been the 
fruits of Apostles and messengers and believers, in 
whom the power of Christ was. 

Go forth! brethren, beloved, to your glorious work 
amongst the nations of the earth. You will leave 
behind you kindly memories for those who have 
listened to your loving counsels. 

Go forth! and tell every believer that the power of 
Christ is his, if he will use it. We may say nay! We 
are bound to say “ Who is sufficient for these things?” 
We are not permitted to say that the work against 
sin and misery can no longer go on, for that is the 
work of God and Christ, who gives in daily proofs, 
undeserved that He is working with us still. Go forth! 
and when social progress makes its claim for great 
things done, admit the claim ; but claim at the same 
time to be workers in another field of progress, by the 
spiritual power of Christ. Thecreation (to recall the 
apostle’s image) stands with head erect in expectation 
of deliverance from afar; and many a heart will fail 
before that deliverance come,and many a weak faith 
will wither ; many a sufferer will cry, “ How long?” 
many will ask, “Art thou He that should come?” 

With head erect, looking afar towards the grow- 
ing dawn, we will stand in patient éxpectation. 
“ Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a 
crown of life.” 

376 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

No. XXXVIII. (See page 47.) 


Fidelibus in Christo Tesu salutemt. 

Nos Archiepiscopi, Metropolitani, aliique Episcopi 
Sancte Catholice Ecclesie, centum quadraginta 
quinque numero, cum Ecclesia Anglicana pleno iure 
communicantes, super diceceses proprias iurisdic- 
tionem episcopalem exercitantes vel ad episcopalia 
munia in eis obeunda legitime delegati, a diversis 
orbis terrarum regionibus congregati in Palatio 
Lambethano anno Dominice Incarnationis 
MDCCCLXXXVIII, presidente reverendissimo 
Presule Edwardo Divina Providentia Archiepiscopo 
Cantuariensi totius Angliz Primate et Metro- 
politano, in dicti palatii sacello participes facti sacro- 
sanctorum mysteriorum corporis et sanguinis Domini 
nostri Iesu Christi et orationibus adunati ad Spiritus 
Sancti directionem impetrandam, de questionibus 
compluribus nobis propositis consilium inivimus, 
ad salutem populi Dei et ad statum Ecclesie per 
diversas mundi partes diffuse pertinentibus. 

His quzstionibus sedulo et serio deliberandis 
mensem integrum impendimus, tum publico conventu 
tum extra conventum quibuscunque res singulz 
delegate erant. Nunc demum ea que de his rebus 
nobis placuerunt fidelibus in Christo commendamus. 

Huic epistole duplicem documentorum  seriem 
adiunximus, quarum prima Sententias Conventus 
sollemnes continet altera delegationum singularum 
Relationes. Illud autem memoria tenendum eorum 
solum que in priore genere continentur rationem 
a Conventu nostro esse petendam. Delegationum 

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 377 

enim Relationes in tantum Conventus animum 
exprimere credende sunt, quantum in Sententiis 
vel rursus confirmate sint vel ipsis verbis in 
Sententiis excipiantur. Sed operz pretium habuimus 
has Relationes typis exprimere cum _ locupletem 
videantur meditationi vestre materiam suppeditare.* 

Imprimis vero quzstionibus moralibus ad vitae 
regimen utilibus, que Conventui proposite erant, 
animadverti volumus; et his omnibus preeponimus 
quz dicenda sunt de officio Ecclesiae ad temperan- 
tiam et castitatem promovendam. 

De Temperantia circa potus temulentos. 

Multos per annos viri magnanimi, sibi minime 
parcentes, fortiter connisi sunt ad ebrietatem abo- 
lendam, quorum conatus ut multiplici auctu, crescant 
sedulo optamus. Mala enim que ex hoc peccato 
ecclesiz et genti nostre oriuntur, vix verbis supra 
veritatem augeri possunt. Sed moneri vos oportet 
ne sententiz false aures prebeatis que si latius 
irrepat bono operi et magno damnum illatura est. 
Cum enim utilissimam credamus abstinentiam circa 
potus temulentos que absoluta vocetur (¢otal absti- 
. nence), Si pro instrumento ad finem bonum habeatur, 
eas tamen voces improbare volumus que usum vini 
in se damnant nulla ratione habita eorum que vel 
nobis vel aliis insequantur ; et reprehendi a nobis 
significavimus consuetudinem quorundam, qui, ut 
fertur, in sacris mysteriis celebrandis alio liquore 
utuntur; que consuetudo ex hac sententia tacite 
concepta originem duxisse videtur. 

[ Sententza I1.—Pronuntiant episcopi in hoc Con- 
ventu congregati usum succi ex uvis non fermentati 
vel alius cuiuscunque liquoris quam veri vini, vel aqua 
mixti vel meraci, pro elemento calicis in Sacra 

* In hac interpretatione Sententias illas propriis Epistolz 
locis subiunximus, quantum necesse erat ad Epistolam intelle- 
gendam, et Relationum tantum quod omitti non poterat. 

2 2B 

478. Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

Communione administrandi, exemplo Domini non 
esse consentaneum et ab Ecclesiz Catholice con- 
suetudine pervicacius recedere. ] 

De Castitate Vite. 

Contra vero his ultimis temporibus vix tandem 
Christianz societatis conscientia experrecta est ut 
enaviter agendum esse sentiat ad castitatem vite 
vindicandam. Nos ergo hance occasionem arripere 
volumus, que ex distantibus terrarum regionibus eos 
congregavit qui Communionis Anglicanze personam 
gerunt, ut sacrum bellum adversus hoc peccatum edi- 
camus, quod ante omnia corpus Christi coinquinat et 
sancti Spiritus templum polluit. Graves et serias voces 
Relationis in memoriam redigimus; nihil enim nisi 
communem omnium Christianorum operam huic malo 
cohibendo sufficere credimus. Provocamus igitur vos 
ut succurratis discipline sanctz et severe ; et appel- 
lamus omnes, ad quos hzc vox nostra pervenerit, ut 
coniunctis viribus iudicium hominum de his rebus 
castigemus, et traditiones ignobiles et corruptas 
penitus aboleamus, que non solum nomen Magistri 
nostri Christi dedecorent,-sed etiam naturam huma- 
nam in imagine Dei factam ignominia afficiant. 

[Relatio Delegatorum de hac re omnibus Episcoptis 
tla placuit ut nec addere quidguam nec detrahere 
voluerint. | 

De Sanctitate Matrimoniz, 

Huic rei necessario coniuncta est conservatio sanc- 
titatis matrimonii, de qua tota virtus publica pendet. 
Damnum autem huic sanctitati non minimum 
illatum est, legibus in quibusdam regionibus latis, 
per quas pluribus de causis quam antea factum erat 
divortium conceditur. Przceptum igitur Christi de 
ea re iterum a nobis asseverandum censuimus, et 
clericis nostraa Communionis consilia damus quales 
se prestare debeant adversus eos qui contra legem 
Domini deliquerint. 

[Sententia 1V.—(A). Cum Domini nostri verba 

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 379 

divortium diserte prohibeant, excepta fornicationis 
vel adulterii causa, non alia certe de causa, preter 
exceptam, divortium agnoscere potest ecclesia Chris- 
tiana, neque quocunque modo ratum facere matrimo- 
nium cuiuscunque persone, contra hanc legem 
separate, persona altera superstite. 

(Β.) Matrimonio ob fornicationem vel adulterium 
dissoluto, nequaquam oportet personam nocentem 
benedictione ecclesiastica in secundas nuptias haberi 
dignam, superstite persona innocente. 

(c.) Cum cognoverimus diversas semper in ecclesia 
fuisse sententias, matrimonio ob adulterium dissoluto, 
utrum voluerit Dominus necne a secundis nuptiis 
personam innocentem prohibere, consilium dat. Con- 
ventus ne clerici admoneantur ut a sacramentis 
ceterisque ecclesie privilegiis eos arceant, qui 
civilibus legibus concedentibus ita nuptias inierint.] 

De Polygamia. 

Sanctitas matrimonii, quale inter Christianos con- 
trahitur fideli coniunctione unius viri cum una femina 
constat usquedum coniunctio illa morte dissolvatur, 
Gentium quidem paganarum polygamicas societates 
inter omnes constat a lege Christi damnari; quzs- 
tionibus autem multis et difficilibus dant locum, 
que preterito tempore variis modis solute sunt. Nos 
vero cum ea omnia perspexerimus quz missionarii 
ex variis regionibus diversa retulerint, nihil sane 
de rebus pauxillis statuere voluimus, quas praesi- 
dentibus ecclesiarum per loca constitutis decidendas 
reliquimus, sed preecepta quedam gravioris momenti 
dedimus, quibus solis credimus missionarios tuto 
dirigi posse. Imprimis. vero nobis cure fuit ut 
Christianam matrimonii notionem salvam atque in- 
columem servaremus, successus illos, qui aliter protinus 
et cito fierent in evangelio propagando, minimum 
valere rati si hac notione imminuta vel confusa redi- 

[Sententia V.—(A.) Conventui placuit ad bap- 

a a2 

380 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

tismum non admittendos eos qui in polygamia 
vivant, sed inter catechumenos habendos, et dis- 
cipline Christiane subiciendos donec possint se ad 
legem Christi conformare. 

(B). Conventui visum est polygamorum virorum 
feminas ad baptismum nonnunquam admitti posse, 
sed presidentibus ecclesiz per loca constitutis iudi- 
cium relinquendum esse quo tempore et quibus 
condicionibus tales baptizari expediat.] 

De dte Dominica. 

Digna Dominice observatio, ut diei requietis cultus 
divini et evangelice institutionis, recta via ad Chris- 
tianz societatis salutem et incolumitatem confert. 
Proximis vero temporibus hanc diem minus ac 
minus diligenter observari animadvertimus, unde 
sanctitas eius in discrimen veniat. Hoc _ igitur 
maxime deprecati, hortamur eos qui otio fruuntur 
ne commodorum suorum gratia occasiones requietis 
et cultus divini aliis subtrahant. Dominos et opera- 
rum conductores hortamur ut famulis et opificibus 
iura studiose conservent. Dies enim Dominica pro 
hereditate inzstimabili nobis habenda est; qua si 
quis abutitur metuendo iudicio obnoxius est. 

[Sententia VII.—(A:) Conventui visum est obser- 
vantiam religiosam unius diei ex septem, quarto 
mandato sancitam, lege divina hominibus iniungi. 

(B) Usque ab resurrectione Domini primam heb- 
domadis a Christianis observatam fuisse, ut cultui 
divino et requieti propriam, et Dominicze nomine 
insignitam in sabbati locum paullatim successisse, 
cum pro festo magno a Christiana ecclesia singulis 
hebdomadibus celebraretur. 

(c). Observantiam Dominic, ut diei requietis cul- 
tus divini et doctrine sacre, inzestimabili bono fuisse 
omnibus regionibus Christianis per quas obtinuerit. 

(D). Observantiz huius neglegentiam, in dies cres- 
centem, sanctitatem eius et utilitatem in maximum 
discrimen adducere. 

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 481 

(E). Maxime deprecandam esse consuetudinem 
quorundam ordinum hominum, qui divitiis otioque 
abundent, iam latius se diffundentem, ut Dominica 
die ad delectationes huius mundi abutantur. 

(F). Illud maxime evitandum ne quid ab illa 
requie deroget, qua in hac die famuli aeque ac 
magistri, et opifices aque ac operarum conductores, 
iure frui debent.] 

De Soctalismo. 

His ad mores spectantibus arctissime coheret 
quzstio quomodo se gerere debeat Ecclesia Chris- 
tiana adversus hodiernas de vita publica controversias. 
Cum enim immodica varietate bona huius mundi 
distribuantur, cum hic divitiz ingentes accumulentur, 
et illic miseranda conspiciatur inopia, necesse est 
multis et anxiis cogitationibus turbari eum qui 
mentem Christi induere velit. Nihil igitur consi- 
deratione dignius, vel clericis vel laicis, quam ques- 
tiones de Socialismo qui vocatur agitate. Meditatio 
autem de propositis que ad zqualitatem tendant 
circa huius mundi bona, et leta susceptio eorum 
quz a quoquam vel bene suscepta vel bene gesta 
sint, cum excogitatione rationum quibus, sive legum 
latione, sive societate voluntaria, sive alio modo quo- 
cunque pacifice et sine seditione aut iniuria queestiones 
iste ad solutionem perducende sint, hec inter 
nobilissima studia reputamus quibus viri, qui Christi 
vestigiis insistere velint, semet ipsos dedere potuerint. 
Presto sunt autem in Relatione que ad solutionem 
harum controversiarum conferre videantur. 

De Migrantibus. 

Unum autem hominum genus prez ceteris Con- 
ventus nostri cura et humanitate dignum esse vide- 
batur. Migrantium enim numerus Britannicarum 
insularum ecclesias ecclesia Americanz et coloniarum 
nostrarum ecclesiis vivo vinculo alligat. Nihil igitur 

382 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

Conventus nostri deliberationibus magis erat proprium 
quam, quid huic tantz multitudini debeamus reputare 
qui communem nobiscum sortiti sint fidem. Illud 
certe, si quid aliud, ecclesiz est officium, ut profectos 
ex antiqua patria in novam benevolis oculis per 
totum iter consequatur, ut cura vigili respiciat, et 
pericula que circa viam et animz eorum et spiritui 
insidientur avertat. Sunt vero in Relatione non- 
nulla que credamus ad hanc finem conferre posse. 

De certa circa Fidem Doctrina. 

Cum igitur de his questionibus ita decreverimus 
ut preceptis Domini et evangelice discipline, qua- 
tenus aut privatorum hominum mores, aut vitam 
publicam tangant, primum locum tribuamus, ea iam 
perscrutemur que ecclesiz partim habeant vel partim 
possint prospicere ad ea fidei principia tradenda qui- 
bus illa morum disciplina fundata sit. 

Nobis vero persuasum est hoc opus magna 
diligentia et emendatione multa indigere. Juniorum 
enim institutioni circa religionem multa desunt, 
preesertim ubi de doctrina Christiana agitur. Que 
incommoda non unum tantum ordinem hominum 
tangunt, sed et laicos accingere se oportet ut cum 
clericis huic malo medeantur. Et parentibus quidem 
hoc opus a Deo mandatum est. Susceptores autem 
monendi sunt ut officium in parvulos, pro quibus in 
baptismo responderint, fideliter expleant, et caveant 
ne indocti maneant vel minus parati ad sigillum 
Confirmationis accedant. Catechizandi autem usus 
in propatulo habitus et preparatio eorum sollemnis 
qui ad Confirmationem instituuntur in maius provehi 
sine dubio possunt. Simul et cura magis assidua 
et studio clericorum diligentiore indigent schole que 
vocantur dominicales, quam ut multis in locis res 
nunc se habet. Institutio autem eorum qui in 
huiusmodi scholis doceant, et alumno-przeceptorum 
(pupil teachers) in scholis que feruntur elementa- 
ribus, opus si quid aliud necessarium parocho et 

Latin. Version of the Encyclical Letter. 383 

pastori credendum est. Porro oportet pastorem 
morum precepta que ex Bibliis trahit ita confirmare 
ut discipulos iterum atque iterum ad sanctiones legis 
divine revocet et ad congrua doctrine et disciplinze 
exempla que in iisdem scripturis reperiuntur. Possunt 
autem, etiam amplius quam nunc fit, contionantes 
in ecclesia fidei simul et moribus consulere, et 
rationi divinorum officiorum lucem afferendo audien- 
tes perducere ut intellegant quali inter se vinculo 
coniungantur cultus Dei et fides et opera—id est quid 
doceant Liber Precum publicarum, et Catechismus 
et Symbola. 

Non tamen propter iuniores tantum, vel propter 
eos quos gregibus suis adscriptos habent, clericos 
oportet certz et accurate fidei doctrine studere. 

Meditatio certe sacrz Scripture exercitationis 
ingenii Christianis magna pars est, et Biblia ipsa 
precipuum omnis doctrine circa religionem instru- 
mentum est. Miserum vero dictu, his temporibus, 
multi ex multis locis quasi signo dato Bibliorum 
auctoritatem impugnant, neque ut divine scientie 
thesaurum accipi sinunt; et per omnes hominum 
ordines increbrescunt suspiciones, dubitationes, cen- 
sure infeste et iudicia incredula eorum dogmatum 
que veritate divinitus revelata fundata sunt. 

Quandocunque igitur talia originem. traxerint ex 
ignorantia rationis quze constare debeat inter scientiam 
rerum nature et Revelationem Dei, possunt certe et 
debent patienter et cum benevolentia tractari. Quod 
si physicorum sive inventis sive effatis conturbantur 
mentes hominum, magnopere curandum est ne 
elementa fidei extinguantur, et regenda magis ingenia 
quam coercenda ut veritatem perspiciant, talibus in- 
ventis leges naturz in lucem proferri, quibus recte 
intellectis opus Creatoris magnificum, verbo virtutis 
Eius sustentatum, amplius et zquius estimetur. 

Periculum vero maius ex hac oppugnatione oritur, 
sive plane infesta sive mere incredula dicenda sit, 
utpote difficile nobis. sit definire, quatenus doctrina 

284 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

nostra, vel saltem populi de ea iudicium, videatur 
satis habere rationem earum sententiarum de Sacre 
Scripture inspiratione et presertim de Veteris Testa- 
menti dispensatione et disciplina, que, quamvis in 
ecclesia nunquam diserte sancitz sint,ex longo tamen 
tempore et multis in locis obtinuerint. 

Monendi sunt clerici ut caute et diligenter has 
controversias tractent, et studiosius hortandi ut ad 
unum quasi fundamentum doctrinam suam omnem 
referant,ad Dominum scilicet nostrum Iesum Christum, 
sacrificium pro peccatis nostris, impietatis nostre 
medicinam, vitz omnis spiritualis fontem, conscientize 
voluntatique nostre et normam et exemplar omnium 
virtutum. Ad Ipsum certe et ad opus Ipsius doctrina 
omnis Veteris Testamenti confluit, ex Ipso Novi 
Testamenti doctrina omnis derivatur et spiritu et 
virtute et specie. Ecclesiz autem est ita operari ut 
bona ea, que ex Incarnatione Verbi Dei fluxerint, ad 
vite usum adhibeat et latius proferat, et doctrina 
ecclesia propagatio est dogmatum que super ipsam 
Incarnationem fundata sint quomodo in Symbolis 

De ture mutuo diversarum partium Anglicane 

Ex disceptatione nostra de iure mutuo dicecesium 
et regionum nostre Communionis nonnulla saltem 
prodierunt quz iudicio vestro commendari volumus. 
Primum quidem necesse videtur ad regulas a Conventu 
anni MDCCCLXXVIII. propositas animadvertere, 
et rursus monere intra Communionis nostre fines 
acta cuiusvis ecclesiz vel Provinciz, recte et ordine 
significata, ab aliis ecclesiis et ab his qui in illis con- 
versantur, in honore habenda esse; ne quis sive 
Episcopus seu clericus in dicecesi iure constituta 
sine permissione Episcopi qui ibidem sit ministret ; 
ne quis vero Episcopus clericum quemquam ex alia 
Dicecesi venientem ad sacra ministeria admittat sine 
litteris commendaticiis idoneis. Harum enim regu- 

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 385 

larum neglegentia gravium interdum scandalorum 
occasio facta est. Episcopi quidem, quod ad eos 
attinet, a talibus malis preecavere parati sunt consilium 
privatim dando simul cum consuetis et formatis 
litteris ; sed et clericos decet cautius versari, cum 
tales litteras obsignaturi sint ; eos quoque, qui his 
litteris utuntur, cavere oportet ne graventur si accurate 
quesitum fuerit qui sint ipsi ut quales. Hae enim 
quzestiones, quamquam ipsis fortasse supervacanez 
esse videantur, omnino tamen necessariz sunt ut in 
hac re saluti ecclesiz satisfiat. 

Cavendum certe maxime est ubi de clericis agitur 
ad sacra ministeria in coloniis nostris capessenda 
ordinatis. Enimvero libentissime concedimus eos 
qui ztatis robur in peregrinos labores impenderint, 
seu tandem in patria requiescere seu consueta opera 
novis mutare voluerint, dignos esse quibus consulatur. 
Sed de hac re generatim decernere impossibile est. 

Illa autem quzstio nobis quasi maioris momenti 
proponebatur utrum Concilium vel Concilia institui 
possent rerum referendarum gratia, que de contro- 
versiis consilium darent vel etiam decernerent a 
prepositis Provinciarum Colonice ecclesiz appellata. 
Qua de re nobis videtur diutissime et consideratissime 
deliberandum, ne cito ac temere potestatem con- 
stituamus quz sive pro Concilio habita sive Iudicio 
publico propior, tum disciplines nostre tum libertati 
detrimentum allutura sit. 

De Christianorum apud nos domestica reconciliatione. 

Post anxiam  disceptationem satis habuimus 
articulos aliquos proponere, qui pro fundamento 
sint a quo progressi, Deo favente, ad domesticam 
Christianorum reconciliationem propius accedere 
possimus. Qui articuli, quattuor numero, in Sententiis 
appositis reperientur. ᾿ 

[Sententia ΧΙ. Conventui placuit hos articulos, 
Deo favente, pro fundamento fore a quo progressi 
ad reconciliationem domesticam propius accedamus:— 

386 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

(A) Sacras Scripturas veteris novique Testamenti 
utpote “omnia ad salutem necessaria continentes,” 
cum pro regula veritatis et norma legitima in rebus 
fidei habendz sint. 
᾿ς (B) Symbolum Apostolicum quod in baptismate 
pronuntiatur, et Nicenum quod fidei Christiane 
idoneam expositionem continet. 

(C) Sacramenta duo a Christo ipso instituta— 
Baptisma  scilicet et cenam Domini—dummodo 
Christi verba in prima institutione usurpata, et 
elementa quibus ipse usus est semper usurpentur. 

(Ὁ) Episcopatum ex antiquis seculis traditum, 
ratione quidem administrationis gentium necessitati- 
bus accommodatum et populorum a Deo in ecclesize 
unitatem vocatorum. 

Sententia XII. Conventus noster prepositos variis 
Communionis. nostre regionibus enixe rogat, ut, 
quantum fieri possit una agentes, notum faciant se 
paratos esse ad fraterna colloquia (sicuti ab 
Americana Ecclesia iam propositum fuerit) eos acci- 
pere qui aliarum Christianarum societatum in gentibus 
Anglicizantibus personas gerant consilii capiendi 
causa, quomodo vel ad reconciliationem integram 
progredi possimus vel ad talem invicem consuetu- 
dinem ex qua temporis progressu arctior quedam 
unitas nascatur. 

Sententia XI1I.—Conventus suadet, immo magni 
momenti esse censet ad reconciliationem confirman- 
dam, ut notitia late diffundatur de doctrine normis 
et de formulis in Ecclesia Anglicana usitatis ; suadet 
etiam ut simili modo divulgetur notitia de formulis 
doctrine cultusque divini et regiminis a ceteris 
Christianorum societatibus receptis, in quas gentes 
Anglicizantes divisz sunt.] 

Anglicana autem Communio, ut videtur, societates 
hominum a se per miseras divisiones separatas hoc 
animo respicit :— 

Parati sumus ad fraterna colloquia omnes recipere 
qui communionem nobiscum perfectiorem expetant. 

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 387 

Condiciones autem ferimus quibus ex sententia et 
persuasione nostra talis communio iniri_possit. 
Quamquam enim vehementissime cupimus fratres a 
nobis aversos complecti, ut voluntas Domini “unus 
grex unus pastor” ad effectum  perducatur, non 
tamen decet nos infideles esse dispensatores magni 
depositi nobis commendati... Neque enim circa fidem 
neque circa disciplinam loco nostro cedere possumus. 
Concordia autem illa, neque vera fieri possit iudicio 
nostro neque optanda quz statione sic relicta fuerit 

Libentissime tamen et cum gratiarum actione 
agnoscimus verum pietatis opus quod a Christianis 
extra Communionem nostram perficitur. Manifesta 
enim et in oculis posita est gratia Dei laboribus 
eorum propter Christi. nomen susceptis impertita. 
Ne quis autem verba nostra aliter accipiat ac dicta 
sunt. Immo probe compertum habemus quibus 
vinculis et quam forti persuasione institutis propriis 
adstricti sint ii qui a nobis dissident. Horum 
ergo rationem habemus, itidemque institutorum 
nostrorum et opinionum ab illis rationem haberi 
volumus. Verum enimvero affirmant testes idonei 
non in Anglia tantum sed in omnibus Christianismi 
regionibus desiderium unitatis verum exstare, homi- 
numque corda maius quam antea factum est ad 
societatem inter Christianos conciliandam commoveri. 
Hac voluntate penitus se affectum fuisse et in dis- 
ceptationibus et in sententiis ostendit noster Conven- 
tus. Faxit igitur Deus ut super aquas turbulentas 
discordiarum religiosarum moveatur spiritus amoris. 

De Ecclesits Scandinavicts. 

Inter gentes que populos Anglicizantes proxime 
contingunt Scandinavice certe numerantur, que et in 
multis dicecesibus nostris frequentia satis magna 
valent. Non mediocris ergo momenti Conventui 
nostro fuit qualem se habere deberet Communio 
Anglicana ergo ecclesias Scandinavicas. Suademus 

388 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

autem in presens et familiarius versandum et mutuam 
invicem cognitionem appetendam usque dum, occa- 
sione oblata, arctiorem societatem ineamus nulla 
tamen institutorum nostrorum, que necessaria cre- 
dimus, iactura facta. 

[Sententia X1V.—Conventui placuit amicitiam 
inter ecclesias Scandinavicas et Anglicanas sedulo 
expetendam ; et condiciones, si que proponantur, ab 
ecclesia Suedica, ad mutuam difficultatum explica- 
tionem spectantes, libentissime accipiendas, ut si 
fieri possit, temporis progressu, communio invicem 
stabiliatur, solido iuris ecclesiastici fundamento 
confirmata. | 

De veteribus Catholicis et aliis. 

Neque vero qui nobiscum consociantur caritate et 
benevolo affectu moveri non possunt erga illos qui in 
Europa continenti ad Reformationem Ecclesiz con- 
tendunt, presertim cum difficultatibus maximis 
impediti eandem plerumque nobiscum rationem 
secuti sint et Episcopatum quasi institutum Apos- 
tolicum obtinuerint. Quamvis enim nondum venisse | 
tempus censeamus ut cum ullis de illorum numero 
societatem omnibus numeris absolutam ineamus, et 
cum festinatam quamvis actionem valde deprecemur, 
quz antiqua et bene cognita iurisdictionis instituta 
violaverit, credimus tamen nullo iuris ecclesiastici 
damno posse nos amicitize dextras prztendere, et 
speramus insuper tempore opportuno fore ut liceat 
cum nonnullis certe illorum arctiore nosmet societate 

[ Sententia XV.—(A). Libentissime agnoscit Con- 
ventus quam digne et libere se gesserit Ecclesia 
Batava veterum Catholicorum, et crebriore fraterne 
amicitiz usu sperandum censet ut multa ex im- 
pedimentis, quz nunc nos ab invicem dirimant, de 
medio fiant. 

(B). Nostrum esse censemus et cum veterum 
Catholicorum Communione in Germania et cum 

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 5380 

“Ecclesia Christiana Catholica” in Helvetia amici- 
ti usum augere et promovere, non solum propter 
studiorum coniunctionem sed etiam ut Deo gratias 
referamus qui, in magnis difficultatibus et angustiis et 
temptationibus, roboraverit illos ut pro veritate pati 
velint; et iura illis pollicemur que a Delegatione 
proposita sunt, eis saltem condicionibus que in 
Relatione significantur. 

Relatio autem ista ita se habet :—“ Nihil obstare 
“nobis videtur quominus et clericos eorum et fideles 
“laicos ad sacram Communionem admittamus, eis- 
“dem scilicet condicionibus quibus apud nos nostri 
“admittantur ; agnoscimus simul et benevolentiam 
“eorum qua iura spiritualia etiam nostris conces- 
“ serint. 

“Propter varietates autem legum matrimonialium 
“infaustas, quas magni momenti estimamus, definien- 
“dum est nobis a sacra Communione prohibendam 
“esse quamvis personam, que matrimonium contra 
“leges et canones Ecclesia Anglicane contraxerit. 
“ Contra vero, ius zequum veteribus Catholicis red- 
“ dentes, neminem nos posse admittere profitemur qui 
“apud eos a sacra communione fuerit prohibendus.” 

(Cc). Benevolentia nostra digna esse veterum 
Catholicorum in Austria studium et voluntatem sibi 
minime parcentium; speramus autem cum res eorum 
ecclesiastica perfecte fuerit et solide constituta pleni- 
orem cum eis societatem nosmet inituros. 

(D). De Reformatoribus autem qui in Italia, Gallia, 
Hispania et Lusitania, iugum condicionum iniquarum 
circa communionem ecclesiasticam excutere conni- 
tantur, speramus fore ut, cum formulas doctrine et 
disciplinee salubres assecuti sint et rem suam more 
Catholico constituerint a nobis liberius agnoscantur. 

(E) Nolumus sane intercedere quominus episcopi 
ecclesiz Catholicz, ultima necessitate cogente, in 
rebus ecclesiasticis peregre se interponant; depre- 
camur tamen quamvis actionem que aut antiqua 

390 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

et bene cognita iurisdictionis instituta aut commoda 
totius Anglicane communionis videatur negligere.] 

De Ecclestis Ortentalibus. 

Sedulo se velle significavit Conventus ut benevolam 
consuetudinem, que nunc Ecclesias Orientales cum 
Communione Anglicana coniungat, confirmare et 
augere possit. Etenim hae Ecclesiz Christianorum 
hominum animos per longum tempus sibi concili- 
averunt. Multa iam saecula persecutionem passz 
in locis multis et tenebrosis evangelice lucis vivam 
flammam servaverunt. Quod si hic et illic lux illa 
languescere aut hebescere videatur, propter hoc etiam 
magis nos decet, tempore opportuno utentes, flammam 
hanc fovere ac conservare. Neque metuendum est ut 
fraterna officia nostra, benigna voluntate, ut par est, 
oblata, ab illis digne excipiantur. Agnoscimus 
autem cum gratiarum actione nulla inter nos et illos 
exstare impedimenta, qualia nos a Latinorum com- 
munione prohibeant, tum propter infallibilitatem 
ecclesiz sollemniter confirmatam quasi in persona 
summi Pontificis inherentem, tum propter dogma 
immaculate conceptionis Beatz Virginis Mariz, et 
alia dogmata Conciliorum Pontificalium auctoritate 
Christianis imposita. Romana quidem ecclesia soro- 
rem Orientalem inique semper tractavit, quippe quae 
Episcopos suos antiquis Dicecesibus ingerat, et pro- 
selytismum strenue et constanter agat. Merito igitur 
haec indignatur Ecclesia Orientalis, ut iniuriam passa, 
cum institutis Catholicis plane contraria sint; nos 
autem Anglicanos cavere decet ne simili modo 

Si quis vero inter Orientales lucem clariorem et 
Spiritualis vita incrementum desideraverit, potest 
sane in ecclesia in qua baptizatus fuerit permanendo, 
lucem circa se aliquo modo diffundere, et civibus suis 
opem afferre. 

Sed cum a proselytismo certe nos ΤΈΡΕΣΞ 

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 391 

debeamus, zequum tamen est iura nostra et statum 
verum ecclesiz nostrz, per annorum seriem stabilite, 
hominibus illis proponere, qui cum rebus novis 
preecipue in religione maxime diffidant, historiam 
tamen Catholic antiquitatis magni faciant. Oportet 
etiam nos institutioni Clericorum in Orientis partibus 
subvenire, et ubi rerum angustia sit etiam scholis 
communibus succurrere. 

[ Sententza XVII. Conventus noster consuetudine 
benevola lztatur qua usi sunt Archiepiscopi Cantuar- 
ienses aliique ex Episcopis Anglicanis cum Patriarchis 
Constantinopoleos aliisque Patriarchis vel Episcopis 
Orientalibus, et sperare se profitetur fore ut progressu 
temporis impedimenta que pleniorem communionem 
iam prohibeant, usu familiari crescente, et diffusa 
luce, e medio tollantur. Fideles autem ad orationes 
de hac re constanter excitat Conventus, suadet 
que eis qui Christi leges nobiscum sequuntur ut 
Reformationi intestine ecclesiarum Orientalium 
consilio et ope subveniant, potius quam singulos hinc 
et illinc a Communione illarum subtrahant. | 

De formulis canonicis apud nos usitaiis. 

His animadversis formulas doctrine et cultus 
divini canonicas, que apud nos receptz sunt, diligen- 
tius a vobis perpendi volumus. Maximi enim 
momenti est et fidem nostram et mores, cum ecclesiis 
antiquis tum eis que per gentes a missionariis iam 
formantur et aluntur, tales ostendi ut neque ullis 
fastidio sint neque libertatem veram impediant, 
neque plenze perfecteque Communioni moram 

Declaramus igitur, priorum Conventuum exemplum 
secuti, nos sub uno Capite divino in unius Catholice 
et Apostolicze Ecclesiz Societate coniungi, unamque 
-Fidem firmiter tenere in scripturis sacris revelatam, ἡ 
symbolis definitam, a primitiva ecclesia constanter 
conservatam et a Conciliis cecumenicis indubitatis 
affirmatam: agnoscimus autem doctrine simul et 

392 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

cultus divini formulas proprias Librum Precum pub- 
licarum cum Catechismo, formam Ordinationis, et 
triginta novem Articulos—hereditatem quidem pre- 
cipuam Ecclesize Anglice, sed plus minusve ab 
omnibus nostre Communionis Ecclesiis receptam. 

Formulas autem istas externis Ecclesiis integras 
et sinceras ostendi volumus. Quippe libertas quo- 
dammodo ecclesiis per gentes paganas succrescen- 
tibus concedenda est; neque enim zquum foret triginta 
novem Articulos integros his imponi pro condicione 
nobiscum communicandi utpote et verbis et forma 
rerum temporumque indole et colore circa originem 
primam affectos. Contra autem non possumus illas 
ut pleno iure nobiscum communicantes et preesertim 
quoad Ordines sacros agnoscere, nisi prius testi- 
monium satis idoneum dederint se eandem, quoad 
substantiam eius,doctrine formam nobiscum obtinere. 
Nec difficile esse putandum, nedum impossibile, 
articulos cum formulis nostris doctrine et cultus divini 
satis concordantes proponere, qui omnibus in ecclesia 
tali ordinandis imponendi sint. 

[ Seztentia XVIII—Ab Archiepiscopo Cantuar- 
iensi expetit Conventus ut consilium cum quibus 
voluerit capiat, qui deliberent utrum expediat inter- 
pretationem Anglicam Symboli Niczni vel formule 
“ Quicunque vult.” quovis modo emendare. 

Sententia X1X.—De Ecclesiis modo nunc consti- 
tutis, preesertim in regionibus nondum Christianis, ita 
iudicamus. Priusquam recognoscantur ut que pleno 
iure communionis nobiscum frui debeant, et preecipue 
quze donum successionis Episcopalis a nobis accipere 
debeant, oportet eos nobis documentis certis ostendere 
se, eandem, quoad substantiam eius, doctrine formam 
nobiscum obtinere, et clericos earum articulis, qui cum 
formularum nostrarum doctrine et cultus divini diserte 
conceptis sententiis concordent, subscribere; non 
tamen ex necessitate tales clericos cogendos esse 

Latin Versivn of the Encyclical Letter. 393 

triginta et novem Articulos Religionis integros 
accipere. | 

Hanc epistolam, Fratres, ad finem perducimus 
humiles et sinceras Deo Omnipotenti gratias agentes, 
propter magnam Eius erga nos benevolentiam et 
caritatem. -Concessit enim nobis ut hic plures numero 
quam antea congregemur. Ex omni autem regione 
orbis terrarum scientiz simul et experientiz thesauri 
in medium collati sunt. Ipsis quoque oculis, plenius 
quam antea fieri poterat, proposita est magnz 
Anglicane Communionis et amplitudo et potentia et 

Quantis facultatibus predita sit, quantis temporum 
opportunitatibus, quantis commodis fruatur intellex- 
imus. In disceptationibus autem communi concilio 
habitis unitatem eius veram esse experti sumus, quan- 
tumvis partes eius vel statu vel maturitate varient. 
Ubi enim discordia sententiarum inter nos fuerit, ibi 
etiam concordia spiritus et propositi unitas; itaque 
recordationibus quas nobiscum reportamus refecti 
roboratique et ad maiora incitati ad diceceses nostras 
alius alia via redibimus. 

Sed beneficii a Deo accepti conscientia cum officii 
debito arcte coniuncta est. Quo magis enim ea 
commoda sentimus, quibus in communione Anglicana 
fruimur, eo magis incendimur ut munera nostra 
exsequamur, que non tantum nostrates tangant, vel 
in evangelio propagando expleantur, sed ad omnes 
ecclesias Dei pertineant. Quippe singulari loco positi 
ad singulare opus evocamur. Deum ergo enixe 
apprecamur ut omnes—clerici pariter ac laici—mani- 
festam Eius voluntatem secum reputent, et quam- 
cumque stationem teneant summis viribus contendant 
ut propositum Eius in finem debitum perducatur. 

His verbis, salutem vobis multam  optantes, 
ea que nobis in hoc Conventu placuerunt studio vestro 
et considerationi tradimus, Deum insuper supplicantes 
ut Spiritus Sanctus cogitationes vestras gubernet et 


304 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

vosmet ipsos in omnem veritatem dirigat, faciatque ut 
consilia nostra per operationes vestras ad gloriam 
Dei vertantur et ad regni Christi incrementum. 

Subscripsi in nomine Conventus, 



ἐν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ συνηθροισμένων ἐν Παλατίῳ Λαμ- 
βηθανῷ μηνὶ ᾿Ιουλίῳ ἔτει awn’ (1888). 

Τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ χαίρειν ἐν Κυρίῳ. 

Ἡμεῖς ᾿Αρχιεπίσκοποι καὶ ᾿Μητροπολῖται καὶ ἄλλοι ἐπί- 
σκοποι τῆς ἁγίας Καθολικῆς Ἐκκλησίας, «“υγκοινωνοῦντες 
ὁλοκλήρως τῇ ᾿Αγγλικανῇ ᾿Εκκλησίᾳ, ἑκατὸν “τεσσαρά- 
κοντα πέντε ὄντες τὸν ἀριθμόν, ἅπαντες ἐπισκοπὴν 
παροικιῶν ἐπιτηδεύοντες ἢ νομίμως ἐπισκοπικὰ τέλη ἐν 
αὐταῖς ἐπιτετραμμένοι, συνελθόντες ἐκ διαφόρων τῆς 
οἰκουμένης κλιμάτων ἐν Παλατίῳ Λαμβηθανῷ ἔ ἔτει σωτη- 
ρίῳ AON, (1888), προεδρεύοντος τοῦ σεβασμιωτάτου 
᾿Εδουάρδου τῇ θείᾳ προνοίᾳ ᾿Αρχιεπισκόπου Καντουα- 
ρίας, ὅλης ᾿Αγγλίας πρωτεύοντος, καὶ Μητροπολίτου, 
μετειληφότες ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ εἰρημένου Παλατίου τῶν 
ἁγίων μυστηρίων τοῦ σώματος καὶ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ 
Κυρίου, καὶ προσευχαῖς ἡνωμένοι ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ ἁγίου 
Πνεύματος χειραγωγίας, ἐξέτασιν πεποιήκαμεν διαφόρων 
ζητημάτων ἡ ἡμῖν προβεβλημένων ἀνηκόντων εἰς τὴν τοῦ 
Θεοῦ λαοῦ εὐπραγίαν καὶ τὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας κατάστασιν 
ἐν διαφόροις τοῦ κόσμου μέρεσιν. 

Περὲ τούτων οὖν ἀκριβῶς καὶ σπουδαίως ὅλον μῆνα 
συμβουλευσάμενοι, κοινῇ τε συνόδῳ καὶ ἰδίᾳ οἷς τὰ 
πράγματα ; κατὰ μέρος ἐπετράπη, παρατιθέμεθα τανῦν τοῖς 
πιστοῖς τὰ περὶ τούτων ἡμῖν δόξαντα. 

5, δ 8 

206 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

Ταύτῃ τῇ ἐπιστολῇ δύο εἴδη ὑπομνημάτων προστε- 
θείκαμεν, δηλαδὴ τὰς τοῦ Συμβουλίου διατάξεις καὶ τὰς 
τῶν ᾿Ἐπιτροπῶν ἐκθέσεις. Ἐ 

Γνωρίζειν δὲ ὑμᾶς θέλομεν ὅτι τὰ πρῶτα μόνον θεωρεῖν 
χρεὼν ὡς UT αὐτοῦ τοῦ Συμβουλίου ἀποπεφασμένα. 
Αἱ γὰρ ἐκθέσεις ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον τὸ τοῦ Συμβουλίου 
φρόνημα ὑποδεικνύασιν ὅσονπερ ἐν ταῖς διατάξεσιν ἢ 
κατὰ τὴν διάνοιαν ἢ αὐτοῖς ῥήμασιν ἀνελήφθησαν. Τὰς 
δὲ ἐκθέσεις ἐκείνας τετυπωμένας ἐκδιδόναι ἄξιον ἡγού- 
μεθα, ὡς τοῖς ἀναγιγνώσκουσιν καρπὸν μελέτης ἱκανὸν 
παραστήσειν δυναμένας. 

Πρῶτον δὴ τὰ ἠθικὰ καὶ πρακτικὰ ἐτάξαμεν περὶ ὧν 
ἐν τῷ Συμβουλίῳ λόγος ἐγένετο᾽ καὶ πρώτιστα τὰ τῆς 
᾿Εκκλησίας καθήκοντα ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐγκρατείας καὶ τῆς 

ἈΝ A 4 A A ἧς τον , 
Περὶ τῆς περὶ τὰ μεθυστικὰ ποτὰ ἐγκρατειας. 

Εὐὐγενῶς ἐκ πολλῶν ἐτῶν ἤδη, καὶ ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ καὶ 
ἐκτὸς, ἠγωνίσαντο ἄνδρες αὐταπαρνητικοὶ ὅπως τὴν περὶ 
τὰ ποτὰ ἀκρασίαν καταργήσωσιν, τοῖς δὲ ἐπιχειρήμασιν 
τούτοις ἐπίδοσιν πολλαπλασίαν μετὰ σπουδῆς εὐχόμεθα. 
Περὶ γὰρ τῶν κακῶν τῶν καὶ τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ καὶ τῷ 
ἡμετέρῳ ἔθνει ἐκ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ταύτης συμβαινόντων 
ὑπερβολικῶς εἰπεῖν οὐ ῥάδιον᾽ ἀλλὰ ἀναγκαῖον ἡγούμεθα 
περὶ ψευδοῦς τινος ὑποθέσεως νουθετικώτερον λέγειν ἵνα 
μὴ τὰ καλῶς εἰργασμένα παρεισδύουσα διαφθείρῃ. Τὴν 
μὲν γὰρ παντελῆ λεγομένην ἀποχὴν τῶν μεθυστικῶν 
ποτῶν περὶ πολλοῦ ποιούμεθα ὡς ἐπὶ τέλει ἀγαθῷ 
ἐπιτηδευομένην" τοὺς δὲ λόγους ἐκείνους ἀποδοκιμάξομεν 
οἷς ἡ τοῦ οἴνου χρῆσις καθ᾽ αὑτὴν καταγινώσκεται, χωρὶς 
τῶν ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς ἢ τοῖς χρωμένοις ἢ καὶ ἑτέροις συμβαινόν- 
Tov’ τὴν δὲ πρᾶξιν τινῶν, ὡς λέγεται, ἐπεμεμψάμεθα ἐκ 
τῆς ὑποθέσεως ταύτης σιγῇ ὑποκειμένης ὡς φαίνεται 

* Ἔν ταύτῃ τῇ μεταφράσει τὰς τοῦ Συμβουλίου διατάξεις ὅσον 
χρέος ἦν τοῖς τῆς ἐπιστολῆς οἰκείοις τόποις παρατεθείκαμεν, τῶν δὲ 
ἐκθέσεων αὐτὰ τἀναγκαιότατα μόνον δεδώκαμεν πρὸς τὴν κατάληψιν 
τῶν δεδογμένων. 

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 307 

ἐκγινομένην, οἵτινες ἑτέρῳ τινὶ ποτῷ ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις 
μυστηρίοις χρῶνται. 

[Διάταξις β΄. Οἱ ἐν τῷ Συμβουλίῳ συναθροισθέντες 
ἐπίσκοποι ἀποφαίνομεν τὴν χρῆσιν τοῦ ἐκ : βοτρύων 
ἀξζυμώτου χυμοῦ ἢ ἄλλου τινὸς πλὴν οἴνου ἀλη- 
θινοῦ κραθέντος ὕδατι ἢ ἢ ἀκράτου, ἐν τῇ μεταδόσει 
τοῦ ποτηρίου ἐν τῇ ἁγίᾳ κοινωνίᾳ, μὴ εἶναι κατὰ 
τὸ ὑπόδειγμα τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ ἔκκλισιν εἶναι 
ἰδιογνώμονα τοῦ τῆς καθολικῆς ἐκκλησίας ἔθους.] 

Περὶ ἁγνείας. 

Περὶ τῆς ἁγνείας μέντοι νῦν δὴ πρῶτον ἄρχεται κινεῖσ- 
θαι εἰ εἰς τὸ ὃ δραστήριον ἡ ἡ τοῦ Χριστιανοῦ πλήθους συνείδησις" 
ἡμεῖς οὖν τῷ καιρῷ τῷδε χρῆσθαι θέλομεν, ἐν ᾧ ἐκ 
μακροτάτων κλιμάτων πρόβουλοι τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινω- 
νίας συνηθροίσθησαν, ὅπως κατ᾽ ἐκείνης τῆς ἁμαρτίας 
ἱερὸν πόλεμον ἀνακηρύσσωμεν, ἣ πρὸ πασῶν τὸ τοῦ 
Χριστοῦ σῶμα μιαίνει καὶ τὸν ναὸν τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος 
κοινοῖ. ᾿Ανακαλούμεθα οὖν τοὺς ἐν τῇ ἐκθέσει λόγους 
τοὺς ἐμβριθεῖς" οὐδενὸς γὰρ ἄλλου ἢ κοινῆς πάντων 
Χριστιανῶν ἐ ἐνεργείας δεῖ ὅ ὅπως τὸ κακὸν τοῦτο παύσωμεν" 
ἐπικαλούμεθα δὲ ὑμᾶς συμμάχους “ἀσκήσεως καθαρᾶς καὶ 
μεγαλοθύμου" ἐπιμαρτυρόμεθα δὲ ἅ ἅπαντας πρὸς οὕστινας 
ἂν ἡ φωνὴ ἡμῶν ἐφίκηται ἵνα ἡμῖν συναντιλαμβάνωνται 
πρὸς τὴν τῆς δημοσίας γνώμης κάθαρσιν, καὶ πρὸς τὴν τῶν 
ἀγεννῶν καὶ σαπρῶν παραδοσέων παντελῆ κατάλυσιν, 
τῶν μὴ μόνον τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ δεσπότου ἡ ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ a ἀτιμα- 
ζουσῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν φύσιν τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην ἐν εἰκόνι 
Θεοῦ κτισθεῖσαν καταισχυνουσῶν. 

[Ἢ ἔκθεσις τῆς ᾿Επιτροπῆς πᾶσιν τοῖς ᾿Επισκόποις 
ἤρεσεν, καὶ ὡς πλείστης σπουδῆς ἀξία ἐπῃνέθη.] 

Ν , ε ’ 
Περι γάμου οσιότητος. 

᾿Αμέσως δὲ τούτου τοῦ λόγου ἔχεται, ἡ τῆς τοῦ γάμου 
ὁσιότητος διαφύλαξις, ἀφ᾽ ἧς πᾶσα ἡ δημοσία ἀρετὴ 

208 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

ἀπήρτηται. Αὕτη δὲ ζημίαν ἔλαβεν οὐ τὴν τυχοῦσαν 
ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρτίως ἐν χώραις τισὶν νενομοθετημένων, καθ᾽ 
ἃ ἡ τοῦ γάμου διάλυσις ἐ ἐπὶ πλείοσιν αἰτίαις ἢ τὸ πρότερον 
συγχωρεῖται. Τὴν οὖν περὶ τούτων Χριστοῦ ἐπιταγὴν 
πάλιν ἀνακηρύσσειν ἀναγκαῖον ἡμῖν ἡγησάμεθα καὶ τοῖς 
κληρικοῖς τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας παραγγελίας τινὰς ὑπο- 
θέσθαι ποίους δεῖ παρέχεσθαι ἑαυτοὺς πρὸς τὰς τοῦ 
Κυριακοῦ κανόνος παραβάσεις. 

[Διάταξις δ΄, (Α.) Τοῦ Κυρίου ῥητῶς τὴν τοῦ γάμου 
διάλυσιν κωλύοντος παρεκτὸς λόγου πορνείας ἢ 
ἀφο γον οὐκ ἐξ ἄλλης αἰτίας χωρὶς τῆς ἐξηρημένης 

ἰαξύγιον ἀποδέχεσθαι δύναται ἡ Χριστιανὴ 
ἐκκλησία, ἢ ὁτῳοῦν τρόπῳ τῷ παρὰ τὸν νόμον 
τοῦτον διαξυγέντι γάμον συναινεῖν, ζῶντος τοῦ 
ἑτέρου T οσώπου. 

(8. Papou διὰ πορνείαν ἢ μουχείαν διαλυθέντος οὐδαμῶς 
δεῖ τὸ πρόσωπον τὸ τῆς αἰτίας ἔνοχον. εἰς μετά- 
An εὐλογίας ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἐφ᾽ ἑτέρῳ γάμῳ 
ἀξιοῦσθαι, ζῶντος τοῦ ἀναιτίου. 

(Γ.) ᾿Επειδήπερ οἴδαμεν διημφισβητῆσθαι πολλάκις 
ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ; γάμου διὰ μοιχείαν διαλυθέντος, 
πότερον ἐβούλετο ὁ ὁ Κύριος τῷ ἀναιτίῳ προσώπῳ 
γάμον ἀπαγορεύειν ἢ μὴ, παραινεῖ τὸ Συμβούλιον 
τοῖς κληρικοῖς παραγγελίας μὴ διδόναι ὅπως τῶν 
ἁγίων μυστηρίων καὶ τῶν ἄλλων τῆς ἐκκλησίας 
προνομίων τοὺς τοιούτους κωλύωσιν, νόμῳ πόλεως 

Περὶ πολυγαμίας. 

Ἢ τοῦ γάμου ὁσιότης ὡς ἐν Χριστιανοῖς νενομισμένου 
ἐν συζυγίᾳ πιστῇ ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς πρὸς μίαν γυναῖκα κεῖται, 
ἕως ἂν τῷ θανάτῳ ἡ συζυγία διαλυθῇῆ. Αἱ μὲν οὖν 
τῶν ἐθνικῶν πολυγαμικαὶ συνάφειαι ὁμολογουμένως τῷ 
νόμῳ Χριστοῦ κατεγνωσμέναι elo iv’ ἀπορίας δὲ πολλὰς 
ἔργῳ παριστᾶσιν, ὧν ἐν τῷ _ πρόσθεν χρόνῳ διάφοροι 
λύσεις γεγένηνται. Ἡμεῖς μέντοι τὴν πολυγαμίαν σκε- 

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 399 

ψάμενοι πρὸς τὰ ὑπὸ τῶν ἱεραποστόλων ἐκ διαφόρων 
μερῶν τῆς γῆς ἀπαγγελθέντα, τῶν μὲν μικροτέρων ἀπέ- 
χέσθαι ἠξιώσαμεν τοῖς κατὰ τόπους προεστῶσιν τῶν 
ἐκκλησιῶν ἐπιτρέψαντες, τὰ δὲ καθόλου ὁρίσαντες τοιαῦτα 
παρηγγείλαμεν οἷς ἀνάγκην εἶναι νομίζομεν ἐπακολουθεῖν 
τὸν ἱεραπόστολον, τὸν ἀσφαλῶς ἐνεργεῖν βουλόμενον. 
IIp@rov δὲ πάντων τούτου ἐφροντίσαμεν τοῦ τὴν Χρισ- 
τιανικὴν τοῦ γάμου ὑπόληψιν τηρεῖν καὶ διαφυλάττειν, 
νομίσαντες τὰς παραυτίκα καὶ ἐν τάχει ἐπιτυχίας, al 
ἴσως ἂν πρὸς τὴν διάδοσιν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ἐπεγένοντο, ἐν 
μηδενὶ λόγῳ εἶναι διαφθαρείσης καὶ συγχυθείσης τῆς 
ὑπολήψεως ταύτης. 

[Διάταξις ε΄. (A.) Τῷ Συμβουλίῳ ἔδοξε τοὺς ἐν 
πολυγαμίᾳ διαιτωμένους μὴ πρὸς τὸ βάπτισμα 
παρίεσθαι, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς κατηχουμένους καταλέγεσθαι 
καὶ τῇ Χριστιανικῇ διδαχῇ ὑποτάσσεσθαι, ἕως ἂν 
οὕτω καταστῶσιν ὥστε τὸν νόμον Χριστοῦ παρα- 

(Β.) Τῷ Συμβουλίῳ ἔδοξε τὰς τῶν πολυγάμων γυναῖκας 
ἐνίοτε πρὸς τὸ βάπτισμα παριέναι ἐνδέχεσθαι, 
τοὺς δὲ κατὰ τόπους προεστῶτας τῆς ἐκκλησίας 
διαγιγνώσκειν τὰς περιστάσεις ἐν αἷς τὰς τοιαύτας 
βαπτίζειν ἔξεσται.] 

Περὶ τῆς κυριακῆς ἡμέρας. 

Ἢ τῆς κυριακῆς παρατήρησις, ὡς ἡμέρας ἀναπαύσεως 
καὶ θρησκείας καὶ εὐαγγελικῆς διδασκαλίας, τείνει παρευθὺς 
πρὸς τὴν τῆς Χριστιανικῆς πολιτείας εὐταξίαν. Kare- 
νοήσαμεν δὲ προσφάτως τῆς. ἀμελείας προκοπτούσης 
ἀνειμενέστερον τηρεῖσθαι τὴν ἡμέραν, ὥστε κινδυνεύειν 
τὴν ἁγιότητα αὐτῆς ἐλαττωθήσεσθαι. Τοῦτο δὲ μάλιστα 
πάντων ἀπευχόμενοι τοὺς σχολῇ πολλῇ χρωμένους 
ἐπιμαρτυρόμεθα μὴ διὰ φιλαυτίας ἀναπαύσεως καιροὺς 
καὶ θρησκείας ἑτέροις ὑφαιρεῖν. Τοὺς δὲ δεσπότας 
ἐπιμαρτυρόμεθα καὶ τοὺς ἐργοδότας τὰ τῶν ὑπηρετῶν καὶ 
ἐργατῶν δίκαια φιλοτίμως φυλάττειν. ἸΚληρονομίαν γὰρ 
ἔχομεν παντιμοτάτην τὴν Κυριακὴν ἡμέραν, ὅστις δὲ 
ταυτῇ καταχρῆται δεινῆς κρίσεως ὑπεύθυνος γίγνεται. 

400 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

[Διάταξις ζ΄. (A.) Τῷ Συμβουλίῳ ἔδοξε τὴν θρησκευ- 
τικὴν παρατήρησιν μιᾶς ἡμέρας ἐν ταῖς ἑπτά, ἐν 
τῇ τετάρτῃ ἐντολῇ διαταχθεῖσαν, θεῖον ἔχειν τὸ 

(Β.) ᾿Απὸ τῆς ἀναστάσεως τοῦ Κυρίου τὴν πρώτην τῆς 
ἑβδομάδος τετηρῆσθαι Χριστιανοῖς ὡς ἡμέραν 
θρησκείας καὶ ἀναπαύσεως, καὶ κυριακὴν ἐπονο- 
μασθεῖσαν τὴν ἱερὰν τάξιν τοῦ σαββάτου ἤρεμα 
διαδέξασθαι ὡς μεγάλην ἑορτὴν κατὰ πᾶσαν 
ἑβδομάδα τῇ Χριστιανῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ. 

(Γ.) Τὴν παρατήρησιν τῆς κυριακῆς, ὡς ἡμέρας ἀνα- 
παύσεως καὶ θρησκείας καὶ θείας διδασκαλίας, 
παντιμότατον ἀγαθὸν γεγονέναι πάσαις Χρισ- 
τιανικαῖς χωραῖς ἐν αἷς διεφυλάχθη. 

(4.) Τὴν καθ᾽’ ἡμέραν αὐξανομένην ἀμέλειαν τῆς 
παρατηρήσεως κινδυνεύειν μέγα τι ὑφαιρήσειν 
τοῦ ἱεροῦ αὐτῆς καὶ φιλανθρώπου χαρακτῆρος. 

(E.) ᾿Απευκτέον εἶναι τὰ μάλιστα τὴν συνήθειάν τινων 
τὴν ἐπεκτεινομένην, τῶν εὐπορίᾳ καὶ σχολῇ 
πολλῇ χρωμένων, τὸ τὴν κυριακὴν εἰς τέρψεις 
βιωτικὰς μεταστρέφειν. 

(Z.) Φυλακτέον εἶναι ἵνα μηδὲν ὑφαιρῆται τῆς ἀναπαυ- 

ο΄ σεῶς ἧς ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ οὐχ ἧττον οἱ ὑπηρέται 
ἢ οἱ κύριοι, οὐδ᾽ ἧττον οἱ χειροτέχναν ἢ οἱ ἐργο- 
δόται δίκαιοί εἰσιν borcudlae 

Περὶ Tod κοινεταιρισμοῦ (Socialism). 

Συνῳκείωται δὲ τοῖς πρακτικοῖς ξητήμασι τούτοις ἡ 
σχέσις τῆς Χριστιανικῆς ἐκκλησίας πρὸς τὰ κοινο- 
πολιτικὰ τὰ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν ἀμφισβητούμενα. Τὸ γὰρ 
περισσῶς ἄνισον τῆς διαδόσεως τῶν βιωτικῶν χρημάτων, 
καὶ ἔνθεν μὲν ὁ ἀποθησαυρισμὸς ἄτοπος γεγενημένος, ἔνθεν 
δὲ ἡ ἀθλιωτάτη πτωχεία---ταῦτα τῷ ἐν ἑαυτῷ τὸ φρόνημα 
τοῦ Χριστοῦ κατέχοντι φροντίδα πολλὴν καὶ μέριμναν 
παρέχει. Οὐδὲν ἄρα λόγου ἀξιώτερόν ἐστιν, οὔτε τοῖς 
κληρικοῖς οὔτε τοῖς λαικοῖς, ἢ τὰ περὶ τοῦ λεγομένου 
κοινεταιρισμοῦ προβεβλημένα. “H δὲ μελέτη τῶν ἐπι- 

Greek Verston of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 401 

χειρημάτων τῶν πρὸς τὸ ἰσόρροπον τεινόντων περὶ τὰ 
ἐκτὸς ἀγαθά, καὶ ἡ μετὰ χαρᾶς ἀποδοχὴ τῶν καλῶς τισιν 
ἢ ἐπινοουμένων ἢ πραττομένων, καὶ τὸ βουλεύεσθαι ὅπως 
εἴτε νομοθεσίᾳ εἴτε ἑταιρείᾳ εἴτε ἄλλῳ τινὶ τρόπῳ εἰρηνικῶς 
καὶ ἄνευ στάσεως καὶ ἀδικίας αἱ ἀπορίαι αὗται λύσεως 
τύχωσιν---ταῦτα ἐν τοῖς γενναιοτάτοις ἀριθμοῦμεν οἷς οἱ 
τοῖς ἴχνεσιν τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐπακολουθεῖν βουλόμενοι 
ἑαυτοὺς παραδιδόναι δύνανται. "ἔστιν δὲ ἐν τῇ ἐκθέσει 
; πρὸς τὴν λύσιν τῶν προβλημάτων τούτων ἂν συμ- 

Περὶ τῶν μεταναστάντων. 

Εἰσὶν δὲ καὶ οἱ ἐξαιρέτως τῆς φροντίδος τοῦ συμβου- 
λίου καὶ συμπαθείας ἐνδικώτατα ἠξιώθησαν. Διὰ γὰρ 
τῶν μεταναστάντων ἡ τῶν Βρεττανικῶν νήσων ἐκκλησία 
τῇ τῶν .Ομοσπόνδων ἸΠολιτειῶν καὶ ταῖς τῶν ἀποικιῶν 
ἐκκλησίαις κοινωνικῷ συνδέσμῳ δέδεται. Οὐδὲν ἄρα 
οἰκειότερον τῷ ἡμετέρῳ συλλόγῳ ἢ τὸ ἐπισκέπτεσθαι τί 
τὸ ὀφειλόμενον τοῖς πολλοῖς τούτοις τοῖς ὁμότιμον ἡμῖν 
πίστιν κεκτημένοις. ἹΠροσήκει δὲ μάλιστα τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ 
κατὰ πᾶσαν τὴν πορείαν ἐκ τῆς ἀρχαίας πατρίδος εἰς 
τὴν νέαν συμπαθέστατα τούτους ἐπισκοπεῖν καὶ μετὰ 
φροντίδος πολλῆς τηρεῖν, καὶ τοὺς κινδύνους τοὺς περὶ 
τὴν ὁδὸν καὶ τῇ ψυχῇ καὶ τῷ πνεύματι ἐγκειμένους 
ἀποτρέπειν. Ἔν δὲ τῇ ἐκθέσει τινὰ ὑποτεθείκαμεν τὰ 
πρὸς τὸ τέλος τοῦτο ὡς πιστεύομεν συμβαλούμενα. 

Περὶ διδασκαλίας καὶ κατηχήσεως. 

Διατάξαντες οὖν οὕτως περὶ τούτων, ὥστε ταῖς ἐπιτα- 
γαῖς τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ τῇ εὐωγγελικῇ εὐταξίᾳ καὶ κατὰ τὸν 
βίον καὶ ἐν τῇ πολιτείᾳ τὸν πρῶτον τόπον ἀποδοῦναι, 
ἐκεῖνα ἤδη ἐπισκεψώμεθα ἃ ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις ἕτοιμα καὶ 
πρόσκαιρά ἐστιν εἰς τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀρχῶν τῆς 
πίστεως αἷς πᾶσα ἡ ἠθικὴ διδασκαλία ἐπῳωκοδόμηται. 

Πεπείσμεθα δὲ ἀνενδοιάστως τὸ ἔργον τοῦτο μελέτης 
ἀκριβοῦς δεῖσθαι καὶ ἐπιδόσεως μεγάλης. “H yap θρη- 

402 Lambeth Conference .of 1888. 

σκευτικὴ προπαιδεία τῶν νεωτέρων ἐντελείας Kal γνησιό- 
τητος πολὺ ἐλλείπει, οὐχ ἥκιστα δὲ περὶ τὴν θείαν διδαχήν. 
Ἢ δὲ ἔλλειψις αὕτη οὐχ ἑνὶ μόνον γένει ἀνθρώπων πρόσ- 
εστιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς λαικοὺς ἑτοιμάσασθαι δεῖ ὡς συλλη- 
ψΨομένους τοῖς κληρικοῖς πρὸς τὴν χρείαν ταύτην. 'Τοῖς 
μὲν οὖν γονεῦσιν παρὰ θεοῦ τοῦτο ἐπέσταλται" τοῖς δὲ 
ἀναδόχοις παραγγέλλειν χρὴ 'ὅπως τοῖς παιδίοις ἀνθ᾽ ὧν 
τῷ Χριστῷ συνετάξαντο τὴν πρέπουσαν ἐπιμέλειαν παρέ- 
χωσιν, ἵνα μὴ ἀδίδακτοι μένωσιν, ἢ πρὸς τὴν σφραγῖδα 
τῆς βεβαιώσεως ἀπαράσκευοι χωρῶσιν. ἸΠολλὴν δὲ 
ἐπίδοσιν ἐπιδέχοιτ᾽ ἂν ἡ φανερῶς γιγνομένη κατήχησις 
καὶ ἡ ἑτοιμασία τῶν πρὸς τὴν βεβαίωσιν τασσομένων. 
“Awa δὲ καὶ συνεχεστέρας ἐπιστάσεως καὶ σπουδῆς ἐπι- 
μελεστέρας παρὰ τῶν κληρικῶν προσδεῖται τὰ σχολεῖα 
τὰ κυριακὰ τῆς νῦν πολλαχοῦ εὑρισκομένης. Tov δὲ ἐν 
τοῖς τοιούτοις διδασκόντων καὶ τῶν-γεοφυτοδιδασκάλων 
(pupil-teachers) ἐν τοῖς δημοτικοῖς σχολείοις (elementary 
schools) τὴν παιδαγωγίαν οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἢ ἔργον ἀπαραίτητον 
τῷ πρεσβυτέρῳ καὶ ποιμένι νομιστέον" τά τε ἠθικὰ καὶ 
πρακτικὰ παραγγέλματα τὰ ἐκ τῶν Βιβλίων βεβαιοῦν 
δεῖ τὸν διδάσκαλον τοὺς μαθητὰς ἀεὶ ἐπανακαχοῦντα ἐπὶ 
τὰς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀπειλὰς καὶ τὰ μετ᾽ αὐτῶν διδαχῆς καὶ 
εὐταξίας οἰκεῖα παραδείγματα ἐν ταῖς αὐταῖς γραφαῖς 
περιλαμβανόμενα. ᾿ἊἘνδέχεται δὲ ἔτε πλέον τῆς νῦν 
μεθόδου τοὺς ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ ὁμιλοῦντας τῇ πίστει ὁμοῦ 
καὶ τῇ τῆς ἀρετῆς πράξει συμβάλλεσθαι, καὶ τοὺς 
ἐξηγουμένους τὸ τῆς ἁγίας θρησκείας σύστημα καὶ τάξιν 
προάγειν τοὺς συναγομένους ὅπως μανθάνωσιν ἀκριβῶς 
οἵαις σχέσεσι᾽ πρὸς ᾿ἀλλήλας. χρῶνται ἡ εὐσέβεια καὶ ἡ 
πίστις καὶ τὰ ἔργα---πτουτέστιν οἷα διδάσκουσιν ἥτε 
βίβλος τῆς δημοσίας εὐχῆς καὶ ἡ κατήχησις καὶ τὰ 

Οὐ μέντοι διὰ τοὺς νεωτέρους μόνον ἢ καὶ διὰ τοὺς 
φανερῶς ἐν τοῖς ποιμνίοις αὐτῶν τεταγμένους ἀσφαλοῦς 
καὶ ἀκριβοῦς διδαχῆς ἐφίεσθαι δεῖ τοὺς κληρικούς. 

Ἢ γὰρ τῶν ἱερῶν γραφῶν μελέτη διανοητικῆς γυμνα- 
σίας μέρος οὐ σμικρὸν τῷ Χριστιανῷ γέγονεν, τὰ δὲ 
βιβλία πρῶτον πάντων ὄργανον πᾶσιν τοῖς τὴν εὐσέβειαν 
ὑφηγουμένοις. ᾿Αλλ᾽ ἐν τῷ παρόντι, κατὰ δυστυχίαν, 

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 403 

πολλοὶ πολλαχόθεν ὡς ἐκ παρατάξεως τοῖς βιβλίοις 
ἐπιστρατεύουσιν, οὐκ ἐῶντες ἀποδέχεσθαι αὐτὰ ὡς θείας 
γνώσεως θησαυρόν, ἐπιπολάζουσι δὲ ἐν πάσῃ τάξει τῆς 
πολιτείας ὑποψίαι πολλαὶ καὶ ἀπορίαι καὶ ἀντιλογίαν 
καὶ κρίσεις ἀγνώμονες τῶν τῇ ἀποκαλύψει τῆς ἀληθείας 
ἐπῳκοδομημένων δογμάτων. 

᾿ς Ὅνταν μὲν οὖν τὰ τοιαῦτα ἐξ ἀπειρίας γίγνηται 
τῆς καθηκούσης σχέσεως τῆς φυσικῆς ἐπιστήμης πρὸς 
τὴν θείαν ἀποκάλυψιν, ἐνδέχεται δὴ καὶ εἰκός ἐστι μετὰ 
πάσης εὐγνωμοσύνης κρίνειν καὶ ὑπομονητικῶς ἀνέχεσθαι. 
"Hap δὲ καὶ ταραχθῶσιν αἱ ψυχαὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων διὰ τῶν 
φυσικῶν εὑρημάτων ἢ ἐκ τῶν φυσιολόγων ἀποφάσεως, 
φροντιστέον ὅπως μὴ τὰ σπέρματα τῆς πίστεως ἀποσβέ- 
σομεν, μᾶλλον δὲ τοὺς οὕτως ταραχθέντας ἐπὶ τὸν 
ἀληθινὸν λόγον προάξομεν, τουτέστιν ἐξ αὐτῶν τῶν 
εὑρημάτων δεικτέον δηλοῦσθαι νόμους οἵτινες, τοῖς ὀρθῶς 
κρίνουσιν τὸ ἔργον τοῦ κτίστου καὶ δημιουργοῦ τὸ ἔνδοξον, 
τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ φερόμενον, μετὰ τιμῆς 
μείζονος διασαφοῦσιν. 

Μείζονα δ᾽ ἔχει Κένδυνον ἡ παράταξις αὕτη, εἴτε σκεπτι- 
κὴν δεῖ λέγειν εἴτε καὶ ἄντικρυς πολεμίαν, διὰ τὸ χαλεπῶς 
ἂν διορίσαι ἡμᾶς μέχρι τίνος ἡ διδαχὴ ἡμῶν, ἢ τοὐλάχ- 
ἐστον ἡ περὶ αὐτῆς τοῦ πλήθους ὑπόληψις, φαίνεσθαι 
δύναται λόγον ἔχουσα ἀρκούντως τῶν περὶ θεοπνευστίας 
καὶ περὶ τῆς ἐν τῇ παλαιᾷ διαθήκῃ προπαιδευτικῆς οἰκονο- 
μίας ἐκ πολλοῦ καὶ πολλαχοῦ." ἐπιπολαζουσῶν δοξῶν, εἰ 
καὶ μηδέποτε ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ κυρίως κεκανονισμένων. 

ΠΠαραινετέον οὖν τοῖς KAnptxois ὅπως τὰ ἀμφισβητή- 
ματα ταῦτα μετ᾽ εὐλαβείας καὶ φιλοπονίας μέταχειρίζωσιν, 
καὶ σπουδαιότατα παρακλητέὸόν σύνδεσμον πάσης τῆς 
διδαχῆς ποιεῖσθαι τὸν Κύριον ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστόν, ὡς 
θυσίαν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, καὶ ἰατρὸν τῆς ἁμαρτω- 
λίας, καὶ πηγὴν πάσης τῆς πνευματικῆς ζωῆς, καὶ ἀπο- 
κάλυψιν τῇ συνειδήσει τῶν τε ὅρων καὶ τῆς προαιρέσεως 
πάσης τῆς ἠθικῆς ἀρετῆς. Eis αὐτὸν γὰρ καὶ εἰς τὸ 
ἔργον αὐτοῦ συντείνουσιν τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης αἱ διδαχαὶ 
πᾶσαι, καὶ ἐξ αὐτοῦ αἱ τῆς καινῆς ῥέουσιν πᾶσαι καὶ 
πνεύματι καὶ δυνάμει καὶ μορφῇ. Τῆς δὲ ἐκκλησίας τὸ 
μὲν ἔργον ἐστὶν ἡ προσκομιδηὴ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις καὶ ἡ 

404 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

> / ” U “ is 

ἐξάπλωσις τῶν χαρισμάτων τῆς ἐνσαρκώσεως τοῦ Λόγου, 

« \ es a A 

ἡ δὲ διδαχὴ ἡ ἀνάπτυξις τῶν ἐπ᾽ αὐτῇ τῇ ἐνσαρκώσει 
΄ > A 

θεολογουμένων, ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς συμβόλοις εὑρίσκεται. 

Περὶ τῶν πρὸς ἄλληλα σχέσεων τῶν μερῶν τῆς 
᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας. 

Ἔν τῇ ζητήσει περὶ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους σχέσιν τῶν 
παροικιῶν καὶ μερῶν τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας ἔνια ἐφεύ- 
ρομεν ἃ καὶ ὑμῖν ὡς ἀξιόλογα παρατιθέμεθα. ᾿Αναγκαῖον 
μὲν πρῶτον φαίνεται ἐπὶ τὰς ἀρχὰς τὰς ὑπὸ τοῦ προτέρου 
Συμβουλίου ἐν ἔτει awon’ (1878) καταβληθείσας ὑμᾶς 
παραπέμπειν, καὶ κελεύειν τὰς τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας 
ἐκκλησίας καὶ τοὺς ἐν αὐταῖς συναναστρεφομένους τὰς 
κυρίως δηλωθείσας πράξεις ἢ παροικίας ἄλλης ἢ ἐπαρχίας 
ἐν τιμῇ ἔχειν" ἐπίσκοπον δὲ μηδένα ἢ κληρικὸν ἐν 
παροικίᾳ νομίμως κατασταθείσῃ, μὴ ἐπιτρέποντος τοῦ 
ἐνταῦθα ἐπισκόπου, λειτουργεῖν. ἐπίσκοπον δὲ μηδένα 
τοὺς ἐξ ἄλλης παροικίας ἐλθόντας κληρικοὺς ἄνευ συστα- 
τικῶν ἐπιστολῶν, καὶ τοῦτο ἱκανῶν, εἰς λειτουργίαν 
δέχεσθαι. “H yap τῶν TolovTwY κανόνων παραμέλησις 
σκανδάλων χαλεπῶν αἰτία γέγονεν. Οἱ μὲν οὖν ἐπίσκο- 
ποι τὰς τοιαύτας βλάβας προφυλάττεσθαι ἕτοιμοί εἰσιν 
ἰδίᾳ τὴν συμβουλὴν διδόντες ἅμα τῷ εἰωθότι καὶ ὡρισμένῳ 
συστατικῷ, τοὺς δὲ κληρικοὺς προσήκει εὐλαβείᾳ μείζονι 
χρῆσθαι τὰς μαρτυρίας ὑποσημαινομένους" τοὺς δὲ τῶν 
μαρτυριῶν δεομένους τοῦ μὴ λίαν εὐπαθεῖς εἰναι κατέχειν 
ἑαυτούς, ἐὰν συμβαίνῃ αὐτοῖς περὶ τοῦ τίνες εἰσὶ καὶ 
ποῖοι τὸ ἦθος ἐξετάζεσθαι" ἡ γὰρ τοιαύτη ἐξέτασις καίπερ 
περισσὴ εἶναι δοκοῦσα πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς γιγνομένη, ἀναγκαία 
ἐστὶν ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ ὅπως τῆς προσηκούσης ἀσφαλείας 

Εὐλαβητέον δὲ μάλιστα περὶ τοὺς εἰς τὴν ἐν ταῖς 
ἀποικίαις λειτουργίαν χειροτονηθέντας. ᾿Ασμενέστατα 
μὲν γὰρ συγγιγνώσκομεν τοὺς τὴν τοῦ βίου ἀκμὴν εἰς τὴν 
ἔξω διακονίαν προθύμως ἐπιδόντας μεγάλης σπουδῆς 
ἀξίους εἶναι ὁπόταν δέη αὐτοὺς προελθόντος τοῦ χρόνου 

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 405 

ἀναπαύεσθαι ὡς ἐν TH πατρίδι ἢ THY οἴκοι ἐργασίαν τῆς 
»Μ > 4 / \ \ 4, ς / 
ἔξω ἀνταλλάττεσθαι. Καθόλου δὲ περὶ τούτων ὁρίζεσθαι 
al a , e , a 
Ἐκεῖνο δὲ ἡμῖν προτέθειται ὡς μεγίστης σπουδῆς ἄξιον 
XN , 4 Ἁ A \ Ζ > “ 
- τὸ εἰ ἐνδέχεται Βουλὴν ἢ Βουλὰς καθιστάναι ἀναφορᾶς 
ἕνεκα, ὥστε συμβουλεύειν περὶ τῶν ζητημάτων ἃ ἂν τύχῃ 
προβεβλημένα ὑπὸ τῶν τὰς ἐπαρχίας τῆς ἐν ταῖς ἀποι- 
κίαις ἐκκλησίας ἐπιτετραμμένων, ἢ καὶ διαγνῶναι. ἹΕερὶ 
δὲ τούτου ἡμῖν δοκεῖ σκέψεως τε δεῖν πολλῆς καὶ βουλῆς 
\ a 3 ΄ 
χρονίας, ὥστε μὴ τελευτῶντας ἀναγκάζεσθαι ἀρχὴν 
καθιστάναι δι᾽ ἧς, εἴτε συμβουλευτικῆς γιγνομένης εἴτε 
δικαστηρίῳ μᾶλλον ἐοικυίας, ἡ εὐκοσμία ἅμα καὶ ἡ 
, ’ 

αὐτονομία κινδύνευοι ἂν βλαβήσεσθαι. 

Ν “A a Ee , A a 
Περὶ τῆς Tap ἡμιν συνενώσεως τῶν Χριστιανων. 

Μετὰ φροντίδος καὶ μερίμνης συμβουλευομένοις ἔδοξεν 
ἡμῖν ἀρκεῖν ὅρους τινὰς προκαταβαλέσθαι ὡς ἀφορμὴν 
ἀφ᾽ ἧς, Θεοῦ συνεργοῦντος, ἐπὶ τὴν οἴκοι συνένωσιν 
ἐγγυτέρω ἂν προχωροῖμεν. Οὗτοι δὲ οἱ ὅροι, τέτταρες 
ὄντες τὸν ἀριθμὸν, ἐν ταῖς παρακειμέναις διατάξεσιν 

[Διάταξις ια΄. Τῷ Συμβουλίῳ ἔδοξε τοὺς ὅρους τούσδε 
ἀναδεῖξαι ὡς ἀφορμήν τινα παρέχοντας ἀφ᾽ ἧς, 
Θεοῦ συνεργοῦντος, ἐπὶ τὴν οἴκοι συνένωσιν 
ἐγγυτέρω ἂν προχωροῖμεν. 

(A.) Τὰς ἁγίας γραφὰς τῆς παλαιᾶς καὶ τῆς καινῆς 

ιαθήκης, τὰ πάντα εἰς σωτηρίαν ἀναγκαῖα κατε- 
χούσας, καὶ κανόνα καὶ κυρίαν στάθμην τῆς 
πίστεως ὑπάρχουσας. 

(Β.) Τὸ σύμβολον τὸ ἀποστολικόν, ἐν βαπτίσματι 
ἐκφωνούμενον, καὶ τὸ Νικαῖον, ἔκθεσιν τελείαν ὃν 
τῆς Χριστιανικῆς πίστεως. 

(Γ.) Τὰ δύο μυστήρια ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Χριστοῦ κεκα- 
νονισμένα----τὸ Βάπτισμα καὶ τὸ ΚΚυριακὸν δεῖπνον 
—pet ἀδιαλείπτου χρήσεως τῶν ἐπὶ τῇ πρώτῃ 
καταστάσει λόγων τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ τῶν ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ 
ὡρισμένων στοιχείων διακονούμενα. 

406 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

(4.) Tv ἐκ γενεῶν ἀρχαίων παραδεδομένην ᾿Ἐπισκοπὴν 
ἐπιτηδείως οἰκονομουμένην ταῖς ἀεὶ κατὰ τόπους 
χρείαις γυγνομέναις τῶν ἐθνῶν καὶ τῶν λαῶν τῶν 
ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ καλουμένων εἰς τὴν ἑνότητα τῆς 

Διάταξις ιβ΄. Τὸ Συμβούλιον μετὰ σπουδῆς παρα- 
καλεῖ τοὺς τὰ μέρη τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας νομίμως 
ἐπιτετρωμμένους, συνεργοῦντας ἀλλήλοις ὅσον 
δυνατόν, ἀποφαίνεσθαι ὡς ἕτοιμοι ὑπάρχουσιν 
συμβουλῆς φιλαδέλφου μετέχειν (οἵανπερ ἤδη 
ἀπεφήνατο ἡ ἐν ταῖς “Ομοσπόνδοις ἸΤΠολιτείαις 
τῆς ᾿Αμερικῆς ἐκκλησία) μετὰ τῶν ἐπιτρόπων 
ἄλλων Χριστιανικῶν κοινωνιῶν τῶν ἐν τοῖς 
᾿Αγγλογλώσσοις ἔθνεσιν, ὅπως λογίξωνται τίνι 
τρόπῳ ἐνδέχεται προχωρεῖν εἴτ᾽ ἐπὶ ὁλοσχερῆ 
συνένωσιν, εἴτ᾽ ἐπὶ τοιαύτην τινὰ σχέσιν ἐξ ἧς ἂν 
ῥᾷον ἢ εἰς ἑνότητα τελειοτέραν ἐν ὑστέρῳ χρόνῳ 

Διάταξις uy’. Td Συμβούλιον παραινεῖ ὡς λόγου 
μάλιστα ἄξιον πρὸς τὴν συνένωσιν, τὸ γνωστοὺς 
ποιεῖν ἅπασιν τοὺς κανόνας τῆς διδαχῆς καὶ τοὺς 
τύπους τῆς λειτουργίας τοὺς ἐν τῇ ᾿Αγγλικανῇ 
ἐκκλησίᾳ νομιζομένους" ἔτι δὲ καὶ τοὐναντίον τοὺς 
κανόνας τῆς διδαχῆς καὶ τῆς θρησκείας καὶ τῆς 
πολιτείας τοὺς ἐν ἄλλαις κοινωνίαις τῶν Χρισ- 
τιανῶν νομιζομένους, εἰς ἃς τὰ ᾿Αγγλόγλωσσα 
ἔθνη κατατέτμηται. 

Δοκεῖ δὲ ἡ τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας σχέσις πρὸς 
τοὺς ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς διὰ τῶν ἀθλίων σχισμάτων διακεκριμένους 
τοιάδε τις εἶναι"---- 

τοίμους ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς παρέχομεν πρὸς φιλάδελφον 
συμβουλὴν μετὰ τῶν συγκοινωνίας τελειοτέρας μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν 
μέχρι τινὸς γοῦν ὀρεγομένων. “Opovs δὲ προτίθεμεν ἐφ᾽ 
οἷς ἐνδέχεται καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν πεποίθησιν 
τὴν τοιαύτην συγκοινωνίαν γίγνεσθαι. Ei γὰρ καὶ τὰ 
μάλιστα ποθοῦμεν τοὺς ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν ἠλλοτριωμένους συμ- 
περιλαμβάνειν, ὥστε εἰς ἔργον ἐλθεῖν τὸ τοῦ Κυρίου 

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 407 

“ μία ποίμνη, εἷς ποιμήν," οὐ μέντοι χρὴ ἡμᾶς οἰκονόμους 
ἀπίστους γίγνεσθαι τῆς μεγάλης παρακαταθήκης τῆς 
ἡμῖν παραδεδομένης. Οὔτε γὰρ περὶ τὴν πίστιν οὔτε 
περὶ τὴν ἐκκλησιαστικὴν πολιτείαν τὴν τάξιν τὴν ἡμετέραν 
ἀπολείπειν δυνάμεθα. Ἢ δὲ ὁμονοία ἐκείνη ἡ διὰ τοι- 
αὐτης λιποταξίας ἐγγυγνομένη οὔτε ἀληθινὴ ἂν εἴη οὔτε 
ἐπιπόθητος κατὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν γνώμην. 

᾿Ασμένως μέντοι καὶ pet εὐχαριστίας ἀναγνωρίζομεν 
τὸ ἔργον τῆς εὐσεβείας τὸ ἀληθινὸν τὸ ὑπὸ τῶν Χριστια- 
νῶν τῶν ἔξω τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας φιλοπονούμενον. 
Anrn γάρ ἐστιν καὶ ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡ χάρις ἡ ταῖς ὑπὲρ τοῦ 
Χριστοῦ ἐνεργείαις αὐτῶν συγχωρηθεῖσα. Τὸ δὲ περὶ 
τούτων λεγόμενον οὐ παρανοητέον. Οὐ γὰρ περιορῶμεν 
οἵοις συνδέσμοις καὶ ὡς σταθερᾷ τῇ πεποιθήσει δεδεμένοι 
τῶν ἐπιτηδευμάτων τῶν εἰθισμένων ἔχονται. Ταῦτα δὲ ἐν 
λόγῳ ἔχοντες καὶ τὰς ὑπολήψεις καὶ τὰς γνώμας τὰς 
ἡμετέρας λόγου τυγχάνειν ἀξιοῦμεν. Μαρτυροῦσιν δὴ 
ἄνδρες ἀξιόλογοι ὅτι οὐκ ἐν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν 
πᾶσιν μέρεσιν τῆς Χριστιανότητος πόθος ἀληθινὸς τῆς 
ἑνότητος εὑρίσκεται, καὶ τὰ σπλάγχνα τῶν ἀνθρώπων 
μᾶλλον ἢ τὸ πρὶν ὁμιλίας Χριστιανικῆς ὀρέγεται. Τὴν 
δὲ συμπάθειαν ταύτην καὶ ἐν ταῖς ζητήσεσίν καὶ ἐν ταῖς 
διατάξεσιν ἐν ἑαυτῷ πληρῶς ὑπάρχουσαν ἐνεδείξατο τὸ 
Συμβούλιον" εὐχόμεθα δὲ πρὸ πάντων ὅπως τὸ πνεῦμα 
τῆς ἀγάπης ἐπιφέρηται ἐπάνω τῶν θολερῶν ὑδάτων τῶν 
θρησκευτικῶν διαλογισμῶν. 

Ἢ πρὸς τὴν Σ᾽ κανδιναυικὴν ἐκκλησίαν σχέσις. 

Ἔν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν οἷς ἐπιμίγνυνται μάλιστα οἱ 4 γγλό- 
γλωσσοι ὑπάρχει δηλονότι τὰ Σ᾽ κανδιναυικὰ, καὶ γὰρ ἐν 
πολλαῖς τῶν ἡμετέρων παροικιῶν τῷ πλήθει ὄχλον ἱκανὸν 
συντελεῖ. Οὐκ ἀδιάφορον οὖν τῷ Συμβουλίῳ ποία ἂν 
εἴη ἡ τῆς Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας σχέσις πρὸς τὰς Σ᾿ κανδι- 
ναυικὰς ἐκκλησίας. Παρῃνέσαμεν δὲ ὅπως εἰς ἀκριβεσ- 
τέραν γνῶσιν ἀλλήλων προέλθωμεν καὶ φιλικώτερον 
συναναστρεφώμεθα μέχρις ἂν δυνώμεθα, συγχωρούντων 

408 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

TOV πρωγμάτων, συμμαχίαν οἰκειότεραν ποιήσασθαι, μὴ 
4 A > ΄ 
παραδόντες τὰς ἀρχὰς ἃς ἀναγκαίας ἡγούμεθα. 

. [διάταξις ιδ΄, ᾿Ἔδοξε τῷ συμβουλίῳ σπουδάζειν 

χρῆναι σχέσεις φιλικωτέρας μεταξὺ τῶν Σ᾽ κανδι- 

ναυικῶν ἐκκλησιῶν καὶ τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς ἐκκλησίας 

καταστήσασθαι, τὰς δὲ προκλήσεις τῆς Σ᾽ ονυηδικῆς 

ἐκκλησίας, ἐάν τινες γίγνωνται, πρὸς ἀμοιβαῖον 

σαφηνισμὸν τῶν διαφορῶν, ἀσμενέστατα δέχεσθαι 

ἡμᾶς, βουλομένους εἴ ποτ᾽ ἔσται δυνατόν, προελ- 

ὄντος τοῦ χρόνου, τὴν συγκοινωνίαν ἐπ᾽ ἀρχαῖς 

βεβαίαις τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς πολιτείας καταστή- 

Πρὸς τοὺς ἀρχαίους καθολικοὺς καὶ ἄλλους. 

" 7 \ \ 4 \ 4 \ > Ἁ 

Αδύνατον δὲ μὴ συμπάσχειν τὰ μάλιστα τοὺς εἰς τὴν 
“Δ γγλικανὴν κοινωνίαν συντελοῦντας τοῖς ἐν τῇ ἠπείρῳ τῆς 
Εὐρώπης εἰς μεταρρύθμισιν τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἀγωνιζομένοις, 
τοῖς ἐπὶ μεγίσταις δυσκολίαις ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ τὴν αὐτὴν 
μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν τάξιν κατασχοῦσιν καὶ τὴν ᾿Επισκοπὴν ὡς 
ἀποστολικὴν κτίσιν κρατήσασιν. 'Τουγαροῦν οὔπω 
παρεῖναι τὸν καιρὸν ἡγούμενοι ἐν ᾧ συνθήκην πρὸς τού- 
των τινὰς ἀμέσως γράφειν δυνάμεθα, καὶ ἐξαιφνίδιον 
πρᾶξιν οἱανδήποτε ἀποποιούμενοι, ἀρχαίους καὶ 
γνωρίμους κανόνας τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς πολιτείας μέλ- 
λουσαν παραβαίνειν, ἡγούμεθα μέντοι δύνασθαι ἡμᾶς τὰ 
τῆς φιλίας προτείνειν, μὴ παριδόντες τοὺς κανόνας 
ἐκείνους, «αἱ ἐλπίζομεν ἐν καιρῷ καθήκοντι μετὰ τινῶν 
γοῦν τῶν κοινωνιῶν τούτων συνθήκην καὶ συμμαχίαν 

[Διάταξις ιε΄. (4.) ᾿Ασμένως κατενόησε τὸ Συμβούλιον 
τὸ σεμνὸν καὶ αὔταρκες τῆς τάξεως τῆς ὑπὸ τῆς 
ἀρχαίας καθολικῆς ἐκκλησίας τῆς ᾿“Ολλανδίας 
διατηρουμένης καὶ πρὸς συχνοτέραν καὶ φιλάδελφον 
ἐπιμιξίαν ἀποβλέπει ὅπως ἐκποδὼν γίγνηται 
πολλὰ τῶν ἡμᾶς καὶ αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ παρὸν διαι- 

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 409 




Καθήκειν ἡμῖν ἡγούμεθα πρός τε τὴν ἀρχαίαν 
καθολικὴν κοινωνίαν ἐν Γερμανίᾳ καὶ πρὸς τὴν 
“ς Χριστιανὴν καθολικὴν ἐκκλησίαν" τῆς Ελβετίας 
φιλόφρονασυναναστροφὴν προτρέψασθαι, οὐ μόνον 
διὰ συμπάθειαν ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ Θεῷ εὐχαριστοῦντας 
τῷ ἐν μεγάλαις ἀπορίαις καὶ δυσκολίαις ἅμα δὲ καὶ 
πειρασμοῖς πρὸς τὸ πάσχειν ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀληθείας 
ἐνδυναμώσαντι αὐτούς" καὶ τὰ προνόμια αὐτοῖς 
παρέχομεν τὰ ὑπὸ τῆς ᾿Επιτροπῆς ὑποτεθέντα, 
ἐπὶ τοῖς ἐν τῇ ἐκθέσει Snrovpévois.* 

Συμπαθείας ἀξία ἐστὶν ἡ τῶν ἀρχαίων καθολικῶν 
ἐν Αὐστρίᾳ αὐταπαρνητικὴ προθυμία, ἐλπίζομεν 
δὲ, τῆς διοργανώσεως αὐτῶν στερεᾶς ἀρκούντως καὶ 
τελείας γενομένης, γενικωτέραν κοινωνίαν καθισ- 
τάναι δυνήσεσθαι. 

Περὶ δὲ τῶν μεταρρυθμιστῶν τῶν ἐν ᾿Ιταλίᾳ καὶ 
Γαλλίᾳ καὶ ᾿Ισπανίᾳ καὶ Δουσιτανίᾳ τῶν τοὺς 
ἀθέσμους ὅρους τῆς κοινωνίας ἀποσειομένων, 
ἐλπίζομεν αὐτοὺς τύπους οὕτως ὑγιαινούσης 
διδαχῆς καὶ πολιτείας δέξεσθαι, καὶ διοργάνωσιν 
οὕτως καθολικὴν παρασκευάσεσθαι, ὥστε δύνασθαι 
ἡμᾶς ἐντελεστέρῳ Twi τρόπῳ ἀποδέχεσθαι 

(E.) Μὴ βουλόμενοι ἐμποδίζειν τοὺς τῆς καθολικῆς 

ἐκκλησίας ἐπισκόπους τοῦ κατὰ τὸ δίκαιον ἔπεμ- 
βαίνειν εἰς τὰ πράγματα ἐπειγούσης τῆς ἐσχάτης 
ἀνάγκης, παραιτούμεθα μέντοι πρᾶξιν ὁποιανδή- 
ποτε ἥτις ἂν δοκῇ τοὺς ἀρχαίους καὶ βεβαίους 
ὅρους τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς πολιτείας καὶ τὰ 

* Ἔχει δὲ οὕτως ἡ ἔκθεσις"---Οὐδὲν ἡμῖν δοκεῖ κωλύειν μὴ παριέναι 
τοὺς κληρικοὺς αὐτῶν καὶ τοὺς πιστοὺς εἰς ἁγίαν κοινωνίαν ἐφ᾽ οἷς 
καὶ οἱ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν παραγίγνονται, ἀναγνωρίζομεν δὲ καὶ τὴν προθυμίαν 
αὐτῶν τὴν εἰς ἡμᾶς προνόμια πνευματικὰ τοῖς ἡμετέροις παρεχόντων. 
Διὰ δὲ τὰς διαφορὰς τὰς λυπηρὰς τῶν γαμικῶν νόμων, ἃς λόγου 
πολλοῦ ἀξίας ἡγούμεθα, ἀποφαινόμεθα ὅτι ἀδύνατον ἡμῖν παριέναι εἰς 
τὴν ἁγίαν κοινωνίαν τοὺς γεγαμηκότας παρὰ τοὺς νόμους καὶ κανόνας 
τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς ἐκκλησίας" τὸ δὲ ἴσον τοῖς ἀρχαίοις καθολικοῖς ἀπο- 
νέμοντες οὐκ ἂν δυναίμεθα παριέναι τοὺς τῆς κοινωνίας παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς 


410 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

συμφέροντα πάσης τῆς ᾿Α γγλικανῆς κοινωνίας μὴ 

Ἢ πρὸς τὰς ᾿Ανατολικὰς ἐκκλησίας σχέσις. 

Πλείστην σπουδὴν ἐδήλωσεν τὸ Συμβούλιον ὅπως 
τὴν φιλικὴν σχέσιν τὴν ὑπάρχουσαν τῶν ἀνατολικῶν 
ἐκκλησιῶν πρὸς τὴν ᾿Αγγλικανὴν κοινωνίαν βεβαιῶμεν 
καὶ συμπληρῶμεν. Αὗται δ᾽ αἱ ἐκκλησίαι διὰ πολλοῦ 
χρόνου τῆς συμπαθείας τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ ἀξίας ἑαυτὰς 
ἀπέδειξαν, ἀπὸ γενεᾶς γὰρ εἰς γενεὰν ἐν πολλαῖς χώραις 
δὴ καὶ ἐν σκοτεινοῖς τόποις τὴν τοῦ φωτὸς τοῦ εὐαγγελικοῦ 
φλόγα ζῶσαν διέσωσαν. Εἰ δὲ καὶ τὸ φῶς τοῦτο ἔνθεν 
καὶ ἔνθεν ἀσθενὲς εἶναι δοκεῖ καὶ ἀμαυρόν, διὰ τοῦτο 
μᾶλλον καθήκει ἡ ἡμᾶς, τῷ καιρῷ ὡς ἐνδέχεται χρωμένους, 
ἐπιμελεῖσθαι τούτου καὶ περιθάλπειν' οὐδὲ yap ἐστι 
κίνδυνος μὴ οὐ ἡ προσδεκτὰ ἢ ἢ τὰ φιλαδέλφως ὑ ὑπουργούμενα, 
an ὀρθῆς γνώμης καὶ ἀγάπης εἰλικρινοῦς παρεχόμενα. 
Μετὰ δ᾽ εὐχαριστίας κατανοοῦμεν τοιαῦτα ἐμποδίσματα 
κοινωνίας μὴ εἶναι οἷα πρὸς τοὺς Λατεινοὺς δηλαδὴ 
ὑπάρχει, διὰ τὸ κυρίως ὁρισθῆναι τὴν ἀπλανησίαν τῆς 
ἐκκλησίας ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ ὑψίστῳ Ποντίφικι κατοικεῖν, καὶ ὶ διὰ 
τὸ δόγμα τῆς ἁμιάντου συλλήψεως τῆς μακαρίας παρθένου 
Μαρίας, καὶ ἄλλα δόγματα τὰ ὑπὸ τῶν παπικῶν 
συνόδων κεκανονισμένα. rel μὲν οὖν “ῬΡωμαία ἐκκλησία 
τὴν ἀνατολικὴν, ἀδελφὴν οὖσαν, ἀεὶ ἠδίκηκεν. Τοὺς γὰρ 
ἐπισκόπους εἰς τὰς ἀρχαίας παροικίας εἰσβιάξεται, καὶ 
τὸν προσηλυτισμὸν ἐνεργῶς καὶ συστηματικῶς ἐπιτηδεύει. 
Εὐλόγως οὖν ἡ ᾿Ανατολικὴ ἐκκλησία ἀγανακτεῖ ὡς διὰ 
τούτων ὑβρισθεῖσα ἐ ἐναντίων ὄντων διόλου ταῖς καθολικαῖς 
ἀρχαῖς" ἡ ἡμᾶς δὲ χρὴ τοὺς τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας 
ἡμῖν αὐτοῖς προσέχειν μὴ ὁμοίως πως εἰς αὐτὴν ἁμάρ- 

Εἰ γάρ τις παρὰ τοῖς ἀνατολικοῖς φωτὸς λαμπροτέρου 
καὶ πνευματικῆς ζωῆς αὐξήσεως ἐπιθυμεῖ, δύναιτ᾽ ἂν οὗτος 
ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ ἐν 9 ἐβαπτίσθη ἐπιμένων φωτισμόν τινα 
τοῖς συμπολίταις διαδιδόναι. 

᾿Αλλ᾽ ἐν ᾧ τοῦ προσηλυτισμοῦ ὅλως ἀπέχειν δεῖ, εἰκός 

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 411 

ἐστιν ὅμως καὶ δίκαιον τὸ ἀξίωμα τὸ ἀληθινὸν καὶ τὴν 
τάξιν τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἡμῶν ὡς ἱστορικῆς ὑπαρχούσης 
ἀποδείκνυσθαι πρὸς τούτους οἵτινες, τοῖς καινοτομου- 
μένοις, μάλιστα περὶ τῆς θρησκείας, σφόδρα ἐναντιούμενοι, 
τὴν ἱστορίαν μέντοι τῆς καθολικῆς ἀρχαιότητος ἀσμένως 
ἀσπάζονται. 4εῖ δὲ ὑπουργεῖν ἡμᾶς πρὸς τὴν ἐκπαίδευσιν 
τῶν κληρικῶν, καὶ δὴ καὶ ὁπότ᾽ ἂν ἔνδεια χρημάτων ἢ 
ἔτι τοῖς κοινοῖς σχολείοις ὑπηρετεῖν. 

[Διάταξις of. Τὸ Συμβούλιον τοῦτο χαῖρον ἐπὶ τῇ 
φιλικῇ συναναστροφῇ τῇ γενομένῃ μεταξὺ τῶν 
ἀρχιεπισκόπων ἹΚαντουαρίας ἄλλων τε ἐκ τῶν 
᾿Αγγλικανῶν ἐπισκόπων καὶ τῶν ἸΠατριαρχῶν 
Κωνσταντινουπόλεως ἄλλων τε ἀνατολικῶν 
Πατριαρχῶν καὶ ἐπισκόπων, ἀποφαίνεται τὴν 
ἐλπίδα τοῦ τὰ τῆς ἐντελεστέρας κοινωνίας νῦν 
ἐμποδίσματα, προελθόντος τοῦ χρόνου, ἐκποδὼν 
γενήσεσθαι, προκοπτούσης τῆς ἐπιμιξίας καὶ 
αὐξανομένου τοῦ φωτισμοῦ. ἸΠαρακαλεῖ δὲ τὸ 
Συμβούλιον τοὺς πιστοὺς ἐπὶ προσευχὴν ἐκτενῆ 
περὶ τούτου, καὶ ὑποτίθεται τοῖς συγχριστιανοῖς 
ὅτι δεῖ τὰς ἐπινοίας καὶ τὰς ἐνεργείας ἐπὶ τὴν 
ἐσωτερικὴν μεταρρύθμισιν μᾶλλον τῶν ἀνατολι- 
κῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ἀπευθύνειν, ἢ ἐπὶ τὸ ἀφέλκειν ἄλλον 
καὶ ἄλλον εἰς τὴν ἑαυτῶν κοινωνίαν. 

Περὶ τῶν κανονικῶν σταθμῶν διδαχῆς καὶ 

Τούτων δὲ μνησθέντας δεῖ ὑμᾶς τὰς κανονικὰς στάθμας 
διδαχῆς καὶ θρησκείας μετὰ πολλῆς φροντίδος σκοπεῖν. 
Δεῖ γὰρ τὰ μάλιστα καὶ τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν καὶ τὴν πρᾶξιν 
τοιαύτας οὔσας δείκνυσθαι καὶ ταῖς ἀρχαίαις ἐκκλησίαις 
καὶ ταῖς νῦν ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ὑπὸ τῶν ἱεραποστόλων ἀνα- 
τρεφομέναις ἐκκλησίαις, οἷαι μήτε ἂν ἀγανακτήσεως 
αἰτίαν διδῶσιν, μήτε ἀληθινὴν αὐτονομίαν ἐμποδίζωσιν, 
μήτε σκάνδαλα παρέχωσιν τοῖς ἐπὶ τὴν ἐντελῆ κοινωνίαν 
προιέναι βουλομένοις. 

412 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

Τοῖς δὲ προτέροις Σ υμβουλίοις ἑ ἑπόμενοι ἀποφαινόμεθα 
ἑνοῦσθαι ἡμᾶς μιᾷ Κεφαλῇ καὶ Θεῷ καὶ Σωτῆρι ἡ ἡμῶν 
ὑποτεταγμένους, ἐν τῇ κοινωνίᾳ τῆς μιᾶς καθολικῆς καὶ 
ἀποστολικῆς ᾿Εκκλησΐἴίας, κατέχειν τε τὴν μίαν πίστιν τὴν 
ἐν ταῖς «ἁγίαις γραφαῖς ἀποκεκαλυμμένην, ἐν τοῖς Συμ- 
βόλοις « ὡρισμένην, ὑπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆθεν ᾿Εκκλησίας κεκρατη- 
μένην, καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν ἀναμφισβητήτων οἰκουμενικῶν 
Σ᾽ υνόδων κεκανονισμένην" δεχόμεθα δὲ ὥσπερ στάθμας 
διδαχῆς ὁμοῦ καὶ θρησκείας τὴν βίβλον τῆς δημοσίας 
εὐχῆς μετὰ τοῦ ἐμπεριεχομένου κατηχισμοῦ, τὸν δὲ τύπον 
τῆς χειροτονίας, καὶ τὰ τριάκοντα ἐννέα ἄρθρα---κληρο- 
νομίαν ἐξαίρετον τῆς ἐν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ ἐκκλησίας, ἃ καὶ πάντα 
πᾶσαι αἱ τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας ἐκκλησίαι ἢ παντελῶς 
ἢ ὡς ἐπὶ τὰ πλεῖστα ὁμολογοῦσιν. 

Βουλόμεθα δὲ τὰς στάθμας ταύτας τοῖς ἐξωτερικοῖς 
ἐκκλησίαις ἀφελῶς καὶ ἁπλῶς ἐνδείκνυσθαι. ᾿᾿Ελευ- 
θερίαν δὲ μέχρι τινὸς ταῖς ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν βλαστανούσαις 
ἐκκλησίαις συγχωρητέον" οὐ “γὰρ εὔλογον ταῖς τοιαύταις τὰ 
τριάκοντα καὶ ἐννέα ἄρθρα ὅλως ἐπιτάττειν ὡς “ὅρους τῆς 
κοινωνίας, ἐπικεχρωσμένα δὴ καὶ κατὰ τὰ ῥήματα καὶ 
κατὰ τὴν μόρφωσιν διὰ τῶν περιστάσεων τῶν κατὰ τὸν 
καιρὸν τῆς συνθέσεως αὐτῶν ἐπιπολαζουσῶν. ᾿Αδύνατον 
δ᾽ ἂν εἴη τοὐναντίον ἡμᾶς μετέχειν. αὐταῖς τῆς τῶν λει- 
τουργῶν χειροτονίας, ὡς πληρῶς ἡμῖν συγκοινωνούσαις, 
μήπω ἀποδεδευγμένου τοῦ τὸν αὐτὸν ἡμῖν κατά γε τὴν 
οὐσίαν τύπον διδαχῆς κρατεῖν. Οὐ μὴν χαλεπὸν ἃ ἂν εἴη, 
ἵνα μὴ ἀδύνατον λέγωμεν, τὸ ἄρθρα συντάττειν, κατὰ 
τὰς στάθμας τὰς ἡμετέρας τῆς διδαχῆς καὶ τῆς θρησκείας, 
ἐπιτακτέα ἅπασιν τοῖς ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τοιαύταις 

[Διάταξις νη: Aire? τὸ Σ υμβούλιον παρὰ τοῦ ἀρχι- 
ἐπισκόπου τῆς Καντουαρίας, ὅπως μετὰ τοιούτων 
ods ἀξίους ἕξει συμβουλεύσηται εἰ σύμφορον 
ἔσται τὴν ᾿Αγγλικὴν ἑρμήνειαν τοῦ Νικαίου 
συμβόλου καὶ τοῦ “ὅστις βούλεται" (quicunque 
vult) ἐπανορθοῦν. 

Διάταξις ιθ΄. Περὶ τῶν νεοκτίστων ἐκκλησιῶν, μάλιστα 
ἐν ταῖς μὴ χριστιαναῖς χώραις, δεῖ ὅρον εἶναι τῆς 

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 413 

ἀναγνωρίσεως αὐτῶν, ὡς πληρῶς ἡμῖν συγκοινω- 
νουσῶν, καὶ μάλιστα τῆς δωρεᾶς παρ᾽ ἡμῶν τῆς 
ἐπισκοπικῆς διαδοχῆς, τὸ δεξασθαι ἡμᾶς παρ᾽ 
αὐτῶν τεκμήρια ἱκανὰ τοῦ αὐτὰς τὴν αὐτὴν κατά 
γε τὴν οὐσίαν διδαχὴν ἡμῖν κρατεῖν, καὶ τοὺς 
κληρικοὺς αὐτῶν ἄρθρα ὑποσημαίνεσθαι κατὰ τὰ 
διαρρήδην ἐν ταῖς στάθμαις ἡμῶν ταῖς περὶ διδαχῆς 
καὶ θρησκείας ἀποπεφασμένα, ἀνάγκην δὲ εἶναι 
μηδεμίαν δέχεσθαι αὐτὰς ὁλοκλήρως τὰ τριάκοντα 
καὶ ἐννέα ἄρθρα τῆς θρησκείας. 

Ταύτην, ἀδελφοὶ, τὴν ἐπιστολὴν εἰς τέλος ἄγομεν 
εὐχαριστίαν ταπεινὴν καὶ ἐγκάρδιον Θεῷ παντοκράτορι 
ἀπονέμοντες ὑπὲρ τῆς μεγάλης πρὸς ἡμᾶς χρηστότητος 
καὶ φιλανθρωπίας. Σ᾿υνεχώρησεν γὰρ ἡμῖν ὧδε συναθροί- 
ζεσθαι πλείοσιν οὖσιν τὸν ἀριθμὸν ἢ τὸ πρίν. Παντα- 
χόθεν δὲ τῆς γῆς γνώσεως ἅμα καὶ ἐμπειρίας θησαυροὶ εἰς 
τὸ κοινὸν συνηνέχθησαν. ᾿Εγένετο δὲ ἡμῖν καταλαμ- 
βάνειν μᾶλλον ἢ τὸ πρὶν ἐδυνάμεθα τό τε μέγεθος καὶ 
τὴν δύναμιν καὶ τὴν ἰσχὺν τῆς μεγάλης ᾿Αγγλικανῆς 

Εἰς ὅσα ἐπιτηδεία ἐστὶν αὕτη, οἵαις δὲ εὐκαιρίαις καὶ οἵοις 

i) 1s aipntsie 
προνομίοις χρῆται---ταῦτα ἡσθόμεθα. °Ev ταῖς ζητήσεσιν 
δὴ ταῖς ἐν κοινῇ συνόδῳ γενομέναις τὴν κατ᾽ οὐσίαν ἑνότητα 
ἐδοκιμάσαμεν τὴν πάσας τὰς διαφορὰς καὶ καταστάσεως 
καὶ προκοπῆς συνάπτουσαν. “Οπου γὰρ γνώμης διαφωνία 
ἐν ἡμῖν ἐγένετο ἐκεῖ καὶ πνεύματος συμφωνία καὶ ἑνότης 
σκοποῦ" καὶ πρὸς τὰς παροικίας ἄλλος ἄλλοσε ἐπανερχ- 
όμεθα ἀναψυχόμενοι ἅμα καὶ ἐνδυναμούμενοι καὶ ἐνθου- 
σιάζοντες ταῖς ἀναμνήσεσιν ἃς μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν κομίζομεν. 

Ἢ δὲ τῆς εὐχαριστίας αἴσθησις ἀμέσως τῇ τοῦ καθή- 
κοντος χρείᾳ συνδέδεται. Ἢ γὰρ ἀληθινὴ κατάληψις τῶν 
προνομίων τῶν ἐν τῇ ᾿Αγγλικανῇ κοινωνίᾳ ἡμῖν ὑπαρ- 
χόντων μείζονα ἡμῖν αἴσθησιν παρέχει τῆς ὀφειλῆς, οὐ 
τῷ ἡμετέρῳ λαῷ μόνον οὐδὲ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν τοῖς ὑπὸ τῶν 
ἱεραποστόλων εὐαγγελιζομένοις, ἀλλὰ καὶ πάσαις ταῖς 
ἐκκλησίαις τοῦ Θεοῦ. ᾿Εξαίρετος γὰρ ἡμῶν ἡ τάξις καὶ 
πρὸς ἐξαίρετον ἔργον εὐκαίρως ἡμᾶς ἀνακαλεῖ. Εὐχ- 
όμεθα δὲ ἐκτενῶς παντας---κληρικοὺς ἅμα καὶ λαικοὺς ---- 

414 Lambeth Conference of 1888. 

τὴν. τοῦ Θεοῦ προαίρεσιν τὴν πρόδηλον ἐνθυμεῖσθαι καὶ 
ἐν οἵᾳ δή ποτε κλήσει γενομένους ἀγωνίζεσθαι ὅπως ἂν 
τὴν βουλὴν Αὐτοῦ εἰς τέλος κατεργάζωνται. 

Τούτοις τοῖς ῥήμασιν ὑμῖν ἀποταξάμενοι τὰ ἐν τῷ 
Σ υμβουλίῳ συμπεπερασμένα τῇ μελέτῃ ὑμῶν παρα- 
δίδομεν, ἱκετεύοντες ὅπως τὸ ἅγιον Π [νεῦμα πάντα τὰ 
ἐνθυμήματα ὑ ὑμῶν. κατευθύνῃ καὶ εἰς πᾶσαν “τὴν ἀλήθειαν 
κατάγῃ ὑμᾶς, καὶ ὅπως τὰ βουλεύματα ἡμῶν διὰ τῆς 
ὑμῶν ἐνεργείας εἰς δόξαν Θεοῦ καὶ προκοπὴν τῆς τοῦ 
Χριστοῦ βασιλείας συντείνῃ. ᾿ 

“Ὑπέγραψα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ Συμβουλίου, 


Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. 

VI ABABA AEB ABA @ @ 2 fm . 

BEING OF GOD, Six Addresses on the. By 

C. J. Etticott, D.D., Bishop of Gloucéster and Bristol. 
PENNE WEN ee IU ins cn epcccncncece δεν νοῦς Cloth boards 1 6 

THE HOLY LAND, By the Rev. Canon 

TRISTRAM. With Mapand numerous Woodcuts. Crown 
νον eee RPEE TRL Cc apxnevecsvescocsocecs ροῦν Cloth boards 4 0 

CALLED TO BE SAINTS: The Minor Festivais 
Devotionally Studied. By Curistina G. 

ROSSETTI, author of ‘‘Seek and Find.” Post 8vo. 
Cloth boards § oO 

ASIA, By the Rev. E. L. Currs, B.A. With 

numerous Illustrations. Crown 8vo............. Cloth boards κα O 


First Century to the Reformation. By the Rev. J. C. 
ROBERTSON. With Map. I2mo. ......... Cloth boards 2 Ὁ 

GOSPELS, THE FOUR. Arranged in the Form 
of an English Harmony, from the Text of the Authorised 
Version. By the Rev. J. M. FULLER, M.A. With 

Analytical Table of Contents and Four Maps. Post 8vo. 
Cloth boards 1 Oo 


Short Biographical Sketches. By the Rev. JULIUS 
LLOYD Mi EME ΒΟΟΣ κὸν τις οἰ ννορξο νος Cloth boards 1 6 

From the Earliest Times to the Present Day. By the 
late E. H. PALMER, M.A. With Map of Palestine and 
Numerous Illustrations. Crown 8vo. ......... Cloth boards 4 0 

LAND OF ISRAEL, THE, A Journal of Travel in 

Palestine, undertaken with special reference to its 
Physical Character. By the Rev. CANON TRISTRAM. 
With Two Maps and Numerous Illustrations. Large 
POU δου Liss Seas covey Meebo se κού γον cre Cloth boards 10 6 


ENGLAND. By the Rev. W. Baker, D.D. 
ΤΌΣ Oy iaaiceceek idee kata eee ἠδ ον κόνις ἐο δον Cloth boards I 

AND WITH TENTS.’ By the Rev. A. C. 

SMITH, M.A. Numerous Illustrations, and Four 
Coloured Plates. Crown 8vo. ...........c00000 Cloth boards § 

PALEY’S EVIDENCES. A New Edition, with 
Notes, Appendix, and Preface. By the Rev. E. A. 
LITTON: RUE δι A i A eee ce Cloth boards 4 

with Notes, Appendix, and Preface. By the Rev. J. S. 
TOWSON, DD. > Post δύδι ᾿νε αν Cloth boards 2 


CHURCH OF ROME. By the Rev. R. F. 

LITTLEDALE, LL.D., ἄς. Revised and Enlarged 
Edition: : Post Owe... ρα τοι Cloth boards 1 

Rev. E. L. Cutts, B.A., Author of ““ Pastoral Counsels,” 

“© St. Cedd’s Cross.” Crown 8vo. ............ Cloth boards 2 

HISTORY. By the Rev. E. L. Currts, B.A., 
Vicar of Holy Trinity, Haverstock Hill. Crown 8vo. 
Cloth boards 3 | 


HISTORY. By the Rev. E. L. Curts, BA, _ 
Author of ‘‘ Pastoral Counsels.” Crown 8vo. Cloth boards καὶ 



φρο» ἂν ατ' 

a 3 4 4 - Ἀ ‘ ‘ ᾿ 
oo be ‘ x ; ᾿ 
᾿ 2 τ Π “ ᾽ 5 
. \ ᾿ 
ὁ ᾿ ν ᾿ 5 
ΓῚ τ ᾿ ᾿ “i ve 
᾿ ᾿ ᾿ i 
. ‘ > ᾿ wo ᾿ υ 5 
’ 5 "3 
« sy 3 > r 
4 > ᾿ Η 


Koes I